[CentOS] partitioning order and IO performance

Timo Schoeler timo.schoeler at riscworks.net
Thu Dec 24 04:39:12 UTC 2009

On 12/23/2009 08:15 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Timo Schoeler wrote:
>> On 12/23/2009 07:29 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>>> Ross Walker wrote:
>>>> I think you might be confusing CAV with CLV of optical drives.
>>>> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_Angular_Velocity
>>> no, I'm not.     most HD's ('green drives' complicate this some) spin at 
>>> a constant RPM, so the rotational latency is the same on the inner and 
>>> outer tracks, an average of 1/2 turn, about 4mS for a 7200 rpm drive, 
>>> and 2mS for a 15000rpm enterprise drive .   However, the data rate 
>>> changes. so the outer tracks have more data on them, which is read at a 
>>> higher speed in megabytes/second
>> That's why in ancient times one was setting up partitions so that the
>> swap area was the the beginning (mostly the outer tracks of the HD --
>> never hit a drive that did it the other way round) of the drive.
>> Try it yourself, get a spare HD and create three partitions on it, two
>> smaller ones at beginning/end of the drive, the third one filling the
>> gap between them; install bonnie++ and compare the transfer rates.
> But these days, nothing should ever be reading from swap, although you 
> might write a bit there.  If it does, buy some more RAM instead of 
> worrying about disk performance.

Sure, absolutely no question; *but* in the (ancient) times it was
important, it was 'nice' to have it as fast as possible, i.e. on the
fastest section(s) of the used HDs. So...


More information about the CentOS mailing list