On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 10:27 -0600, Duane Wessels wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, Alex Rousskov wrote: > > > I do not think it is realistic to expect nearly linear scale (close to > > 100% and 200% increase in performance), especially for the first > > implementation. > > As you know, disk is usually the bottleneck. So I think your goals > and expectations should state whether disk caching is involved or > not. Assuming disk caching is involved, maybe even state what > storage type and a typical hit ratio.
Very good point. I should have said that for this particular question let's consider the "pure" case of no caching (neither disk nor memory). Thank you, Alex.
