|
From: Szakacsits S. <sz...@si...> - 2004-04-10 23:14:47
|
On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 vi...@pa... wrote: > On Sun, Apr 11, 2004 at 12:23:47AM +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote: > > > Just one question, in the most common cases the block size ends up between > > 512 and 4096 bytes. Depending on how this block size used, it can have a > > significant impact on performance (e.g. 512 vs 4096). Is this true or is > > it used to be performance independent? > > Resulting requests are immediately merged anyway. Yes, we get more bio > sitting on top of the merged request; however, it's heavily IO-dominated > and I would be surprised if you really saw any noticable overhead in that > situation. Thanks, I'll test it in the near future unless somebody does it earlier. I have my test stuff but I'm interested of you could suggest specific ones that might exhibit/trigger the overhead if it exists at all. Szaka |
