Which of the description about the performance improvement of OceanStor pacific is wrong?

Question

Options

• ASmall IO performs EC encoding and then places it on the disk.
• BLittle O is aggregated in the cache and then placed on the disk.
• CPacific can turn random small IO into large IO sequential writing
• DLittle O writes to the cache and returns

• A
  14% (6)
• B
  5% (2)
• C
  75% (33)
• D
  7% (3)

Explanation

Option C incorrectly describes Pacific's performance mechanism by claiming it converts random small IO into sequential large IO writes - while Pacific does aggregate small IOs into larger ones via cache, the resulting writes are not necessarily sequential in nature. Options A, B, and D are all accurate: small IO is first written to cache and acknowledged immediately (D), aggregated/coalesced there (B), then EC-encoded and flushed to disk as a larger unit (A) - these three together describe Pacific's actual pipeline. The error in C is adding "sequential writing" as an outcome, which confuses Pacific's write-aggregation mechanism with a sequential I/O conversion, a property it does not specifically guarantee.

Memory tip: Think of Pacific's small-IO flow as "write → cache → aggregate → encode → disk" - C breaks this by skipping cache aggregation and falsely appending "sequential," which is the giveaway that it's the wrong description.

No community discussion yet for this question.