Re: libata in 2.4.24?
From: Jeff Garzik
Date: Tue Dec 02 2003 - 13:08:31 EST
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 11:31:45AM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
> Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > Libata, uses the scsi system instead of the existing ide layer because many
> > > new sata controllers are using an interface that is very similair to scsi
> > > (much like atapi).
> Now I have a different question. Does the scsi-like SATA interface include tcq?
Yes, it does. But it depends on whether or not the host controller
> Because one of the long-standing issues with IDE drives and Postgres is the
> fact that even after issuing an fsync the data may be sitting in the drive's
If true, this is an IDE driver bug... assuming the drive itself
doesn't lie about FLUSH CACHE results (a few do).
> This doesn't happen with SCSI because the drives aren't forced to lie
> about the data being on disk in order to handle subsequent requests. Turning
> off write-caching on IDE drives absolutely destroys performance.
If the drive lies, there isn't a darned thing we can do about it...
> Do the new SATA drives and controllers provide a solution to this?
If the drive lies, there isn't a darned thing the controller can do
about it, either ;-)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/