Re: Small writes being split with fdatasync based on non-aligned partition ending

CC'ing Jens Axboe. On 11 February 2016 at 09:54, Jens Rosenboom wrote: > 2016-02-11 4:48 GMT+01:00 Sitsofe Wheeler : >> Trying to cc the GNU parted and linux-block mailing lists. >> >> On 9 February 2016 at 13:02, Jens Rosenboom wrote: >>> While trying to reproduce some performance issues I

Re: Small writes being split with fdatasync based on non-aligned partition ending

2016-02-11 4:48 GMT+01:00 Sitsofe Wheeler : > Trying to cc the GNU parted and linux-block mailing lists. > > On 9 February 2016 at 13:02, Jens Rosenboom wrote: >> While trying to reproduce some performance issues I have been seeing >> with Ceph, I have come across a strange behaviour which is

Re: Small writes being split with fdatasync based on non-aligned partition ending

CC'ing Jens Axboe. On 11 February 2016 at 09:54, Jens Rosenboom wrote: > 2016-02-11 4:48 GMT+01:00 Sitsofe Wheeler : >> Trying to cc the GNU parted and linux-block mailing lists. >> >> On 9 February 2016 at 13:02, Jens Rosenboom

Re: Small writes being split with fdatasync based on non-aligned partition ending

2016-02-11 4:48 GMT+01:00 Sitsofe Wheeler : > Trying to cc the GNU parted and linux-block mailing lists. > > On 9 February 2016 at 13:02, Jens Rosenboom wrote: >> While trying to reproduce some performance issues I have been seeing >> with Ceph, I have

Re: Small writes being split with fdatasync based on non-aligned partition ending

Trying to cc the GNU parted and linux-block mailing lists. On 9 February 2016 at 13:02, Jens Rosenboom wrote: > While trying to reproduce some performance issues I have been seeing > with Ceph, I have come across a strange behaviour which is seemingly > affected only by the end point (and

Re: Small writes being split with fdatasync based on non-aligned partition ending

Trying to cc the GNU parted and linux-block mailing lists. On 9 February 2016 at 13:02, Jens Rosenboom wrote: > While trying to reproduce some performance issues I have been seeing > with Ceph, I have come across a strange behaviour which is seemingly > affected only by the

Small writes being split with fdatasync based on non-aligned partition ending

While trying to reproduce some performance issues I have been seeing with Ceph, I have come across a strange behaviour which is seemingly affected only by the end point (and thereby the size) of a partition being an odd number of sectors. Since all documentation about alignment only refers to the

Small writes being split with fdatasync based on non-aligned partition ending

While trying to reproduce some performance issues I have been seeing with Ceph, I have come across a strange behaviour which is seemingly affected only by the end point (and thereby the size) of a partition being an odd number of sectors. Since all documentation about alignment only refers to the