5 ms·
Freeblock scheduling (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.33.4632 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.33.4...) can do so
by swolchok 17y ago
Freeblock scheduling (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.33.4632 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.33.4...) can do some of this for disks -- on a completely busy drive, additional data can be scavenged for background processes.
In anticipation of the likely "but it's not really parallel!" rebuttal, I'd like to point out that the internal parallelism is only important for its effect on throughput and latency. Parallelism is not a magic bullet.
- coffeemug 17y agoSure, but that's a hack - you can scavenge some data in some cases but you have no guarantees (or even high likelihood) of getting the stuff you want. SSD parallelism is important for its effect on throughput and latency. If you're reading a database index to satisfy multiple queries, and you need to read in leaves from totally different disk locations you can do it in parallel in SSDs. This has huge potential to improve performance (once databases get around to taking advantage of this).