This has been adopted in external benchmarks for a while, as it manages
to push sequential write performance into a much better region of the
diminishing-returns curve.
But hey! Don't take my word for it, let's see the results from our new
bench_runner for the first time:
NOR throughput cs=1/8 cs=1/16
bench_wt_seq+write 15180.0 29402.6 (+93.7%)
bench_wt_random+write 876.2 957.3 (+9.3%)
bench_wt_logging+write 2001.0 2153.4 (+7.6%)
bench_wt_many+write 453.6 453.6 (+0.0%)
NAND throughput cs=1/8 cs=1/16
bench_wt_seq+write 21778.7 22330.1 (+2.5%)
bench_wt_random+write 3583.0 3637.2 (+1.5%)
bench_wt_logging+write 10855.1 10977.1 (+1.1%)
bench_wt_many+write 68.2 68.2 (+0.0%)
Though this doesn't really capture the tradeoffs related to file tails,
storage usage, etc.
In theory sequential writes are happy to start crystallizing as soon as
any data is written, but this leads to significant waste anytime you're
not going to write most of a block.
Christopher Haster
0ea11c1a0e