From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8B6138010 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:39:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B460C21C00D; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:38:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f54.google.com (mail-wg0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18460E073C for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:35:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wgx1 with SMTP id 1so2181900wgx.11 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 09:35:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=kqlAI+HXmCsPH+972ZaaraFh07R4hCujbLUsnQQujaU=; b=PCDAKt21hIJNaJmf4Eg37wB0uzBG5TMpsHOJRuRx82pW2koKQVdFzqKqdWeLZ0gly7 /EUGPjh1v2PyjA4RBm0h3eyVf2R00YOygbLVrZPbYFiXwneWUhfvtCfg6M5KUxnZaPfw wA5ERtFVZ+goERe+mZhgMJK/4vcTgg9sQXanssSt6bK9ELkfesFt0rj7V8Uegh/omGqp UAbfTqT8fwLrfCMdyZKCObOgYcWXJWglCCatCYD3LM+AwWwtAG247FVskR8MxnhtJIS+ QEhQI/gkFqPZ27ED+BnPQIxnOgIIZ4VZQ0pj6FRR5sFXZFD9X7mZbgi4R4U+XmIgLlzu XT4w== Received: by 10.180.78.4 with SMTP id x4mr19307234wiw.19.1345998955365; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 09:35:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from energy.localnet (p4FC60852.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [79.198.8.82]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ef5sm15275317wib.3.2012.08.26.09.35.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 26 Aug 2012 09:35:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Volker Armin Hemmann To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Cc: Alex Schuster Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] SSD performance tweaking Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 18:35:47 +0200 Message-ID: <3763193.UloezmEAz0@energy> User-Agent: KMail/4.9 (Linux/3.4.9; KDE/4.9.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <503A4B7B.9050301@wonkology.org> References: <1423183.AyWZLp8OMG@energy> <503A4B7B.9050301@wonkology.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archives-Salt: 08dee2e1-134b-42f9-99e1-c8bca9853d74 X-Archives-Hash: 36ab49584c58e77e3ef961f853477b1c Am Sonntag, 26. August 2012, 18:14:51 schrieb Alex Schuster: > Am 26.08.2012 16:21, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann: > > Am Sonntag, 26. August 2012, 14:49:08 schrieb Alex Schuster: > >> Volker Armin Hemmann writes: > >>> Am Sonntag, 26. August 2012, 13:41:09 schrieb Alex Schuster: > >> Yes, I know that. But why exactly does it help to align a partition to > >> the erasable block size? I don't get it. Why isn't it sufficient to > >> align to the usual 4K block size, so that a block never spans over two > >> erasable blocks? > > > > well, for one, there are lots of ssd which have 8k pages. Not 4k. > > Whatever. Then align to 8K instead. But what does this have to do with > the erasable page size? > erasable BLOCK size is the imporant think. PAGE size (4 or 8K) not so much. Because every write comes down to ERASE-WRITE. So you want to align to ERASE BLOCKS and not so much pages. -- #163933