RE: I/O and db_file_multiblock_read_count

  • From: "Kevin Closson" <kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "Mark W. Farnham" <mwf@xxxxxxxx>, <kevin.lidh@xxxxxxxxx>, "Kevin Closson" <kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:13:04 -0800

 >>>I'm still thinking that the data was coming from array cache 
>>>though, but I may have tangled up service requests for i/o 
>>>with the blocking requested by dd, and that may not be 
>>>identical in all the layers down to the rust.

yeah, I'm with you, is such an astonishingly small
datafile it is cachable in a wide variety of include
what representation it has in the 8MB track buffers there is on
all the involved drives...and I don't think we've lokoed at whether
this is even direct I/O.

What I don't want to see happen is some carry-away notion that
larger I/O requests are slower... yes, sometimes man bites dog :-)


Other related posts: