Jason Fesler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Do you have a feel for why having more DSes per RRD file gives better >> performance? > > To be clear: Why, for a given number of DS's, it is cheaper to lump them > together, instead of a DS per file... that would be due to the number of > seeks per update involved, where I/O is mostly defined by how many RRA's > you use in the rrd - not the number of DS's.
Does this boil down to meaning that the parts of a single RRD file are physically close to each other on disk? And that multiple RRD files are further apart? I can see how that would make things a bit faster or slower but it doesn't seem like it would make the huge difference that some people seem to see when they put multiple RRAs into one RRD. Am I just clueless? :) Or does it make sense to you that the difference is huge? -- Unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Help mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/rrd-users WebAdmin http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/lsg2.cgi
