On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 12:56:55AM -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
przemolicc@poczta.fm wrote:
The above numbers are true if we have random (!) IO pattern. In case of sequential (!) IO even SATA disks can deliver much, much higher numbers.
sequential IO is remarkably rare in a typical server environment
Yes, of course: Oracle's redo logs which are key performance factor for all transactions (inserts/updates) have sequential IO pattern. And Oracle is not a typical server environment ....
anyways, the IOPS numbers on sequential operations aren't much higher, they are just transferring more data per operation.
I didn't say that they _are_ much higher. I said that even SATA disks can deliver hight IOPS on condition of sequential IO.
Regards Przemyslaw Bak (przemol) -- http://przemol.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Audi kilka tysiÄcy zĹotych taniej? Przebieraj wĹrĂłd tysiÄcy ogĹoszeĹ! Sprawdz >>> http://linkint.pl/f26b3