From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 12:27:54 -0500 From: William Josephson To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <20090304172754.GA40394@mero.morphisms.net> References: <3aaafc130903032105i742648d2o86ccd2630c4aa61c@mail.gmail.com> <21b55d1c3bb01fa55e90f9400a0cdfb1@quanstro.net> <3aaafc130903040852h691b8742t2052e61334c825eb@mail.gmail.com> <13426df10903040914q5b80031ene90d95d9dd53a19a@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <13426df10903040914q5b80031ene90d95d9dd53a19a@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: Re: [9fans] threads vs forks Topicbox-Message-UUID: b1963938-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:14:35AM -0800, ron minnich wrote: > in most cases write leveling is not in the file system. It's in the > hardware or in a powerpc that is in the SSD controller. It's worth > your doing some reading here. With the exception of a few embedded systems running things like YAFS and JFFS2, wear levelling is done in the controller. > That said, I sure would like to have a fusion IO card for venti. From > what my friend is telling me the fusion card would be ideal for venti > -- as long as we keep only the arenas on it. The Fusion IO cards are pretty impressive: I have one here. I am curious why arena only, however. One thing I have found is that to get good performance requires a fair bit of concurrency. -WJ