On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Leonidas Spyropoulos <artafi...@gmail.com> wrote: > So any clues for the intel 320 series? I think it doesn't use compression.
At this point your best bet is to try it yourself and see. If it doesn't result in poor performance, then keep on using "-o discard". -- Fajar > > On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Fajar A. Nugraha <l...@fajar.net> wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Leonidas Spyropoulos >> <artafi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Chris Samuel <ch...@csamuel.org> wrote: >>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2011 05:45:17 AM Calvin Walton wrote: >>>> This LWN article from 2009 explains why it can be problematic >>>> (especially on SATA drives where TRIM is a non-queued command): >>>> >>>> https://lwn.net/Articles/347511/ >>>> >>> So the current problem with TRIM in ATA (and SATA) is that it >>> introduce delays? As long as it keeps your SSD in a good shape it's >>> still better than not having TRIM at all, right? >> >> Not quite. >> >> Sandforce-based SSDs have their own way of reducing writes (e.g. by >> using internal compression), so you don't have to do anything special. >> Also, AFAIK currently TRIM is useless if the drives are behind a >> hardware raid controller anyway. >> >> My Corsair F60 (on a notebook) is actually MUCH SLOWER with -o discard >> (i.e. writes capped at 100 iops) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
