Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))

From: Daniel Phillips (phillips@arcor.de)
Date: Mon Oct 07 2002 - 14:05:16 EST

Next message: Nicolas Pitre: "Re: New BK License Problem?"
Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Linux v2.5.41"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Next in thread: Linus Torvalds: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Reply: Linus Torvalds: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Monday 07 October 2002 20:31, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > [1] We could teach each filesystem how to read ahead across directories, or
> > we could teach the vfs how to do physical readahead. Choose your poison.
>
> Devices do physical readahead, and it works nicely.

Devices have a few MB of readahead cache, the kernel can have thousands of
times as much.

-- 
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Nicolas Pitre: "Re: New BK License Problem?"
Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Linux v2.5.41"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Next in thread: Linus Torvalds: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Reply: Linus Torvalds: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 22:01:00 EST