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 35135138010 for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2012 22:25:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C8B5CE052E; Sat, 25 Aug 2012 22:24:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ee0-f53.google.com (mail-ee0-f53.google.com [74.125.83.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FC29E035C for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2012 22:22:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eekb47 with SMTP id b47so510428eek.40 for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2012 15:22:56 -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=GvQN3cTB+Qn3dlxbDa3yjX8iIuoYNkcq++R2vBtzUTQ=; b=N4oAYhMWnWvw8ptAexmzOR7j2OoLy9hsWuIsVovUS1B0DLWoBvCv5S4VUSTYxfnz49 envZsmZnoNujNWsE2k0xTAI8+dPqkghqgyc8tk5IXn0K/jjq8SboORkeU6kGVs+0cmEF FL+sMhHOzbrX5EBvKqb6F5RqulDGl0Qfw5At5uUFAVO8Q5D+Y5JbTWdcv0620Qx3mJUT hEB33MfDkZ+9nxEnZQ2eAmUTQlu+7qZNE4g+Bzp6IKjFTfuaVEcFW88U3Jwi0xQgstsy 5/r7/l3waYkvaToTr7imQfT7VlP0IdFblw760qVqB7ZndQb4AIJI6p/ATkf+7zDUo6E7 IOKA== Received: by 10.14.5.67 with SMTP id 43mr12095535eek.15.1345933376268; Sat, 25 Aug 2012 15:22:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from energy.localnet (p4FC612C1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [79.198.18.193]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 45sm39993237eeb.8.2012.08.25.15.22.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 25 Aug 2012 15:22:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Volker Armin Hemmann To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Cc: Frank Steinmetzger Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] SSD performance tweaking Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 00:22:47 +0200 Message-ID: <64095489.fUK2STuJpF@energy> User-Agent: KMail/4.9 (Linux/3.4.9; KDE/4.9.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20120824092548.GA13922@eisen.lan> References: <503602B8.3050507@wonkology.org> <20120824092548.GA13922@eisen.lan> 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: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Archives-Salt: 7adff559-7f3d-4cde-9230-718004097ece X-Archives-Hash: 64cb3b4209540522c2082b02687a8629 Am Freitag, 24. August 2012, 11:25:48 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:15:20PM +0200, Alex Schuster wrote: > > Mark Knecht writes: > > > I'm currently just using a single large partition & ext3. I d= idn't > > >=20 > > > do anything special in fdisk so the partition might not be aligne= d as > > > best it could be. I don't know. > >=20 > > [=E2=80=A6] > > The size of an erasable block of SSDs is even larger, usually 512K,= it > > would be best to align to that, too. A partition offset of 512K or = 1M > > would avoid this. >=20 > Unless the filesystem knows this and starts bigger files at those 512= k > boundaries (so really only one erase cycle is needed for files <=3D51= 2 k), > isn't this fairly superfluous? no, if you misalign, a lot of 4k blocks might span into two erase block= s.=20 Which is bad. If you align correctly, you will never cross them unnece= ssary,=20 sparing your SSD some unnecessary writes and improving overall performa= nce.=20 --=20 #163933