login
Header Space

 
 

Re: performance "regression" in cfq compared to anticipatory, deadline and noop

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Matthew <jackdachef@...>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>, <jens.axboe@...>
Date: Saturday, May 10, 2008 - 5:56 pm

> From: Matthew <jackdachef@gmail.com>

Well, it's not a fix... the overall effect is that you should end
up with more seeks (and so reduced throughput) on loads consisting
of more than one process, and at least one of those processes is a
synchronous sequential reader.



I don't know the overall effect on battery life, btw with no idling
you have one less timer active in the system (that however, depending
on the load, does not fire frequently) and more continuous disk
activity.
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: performance "regression" in cfq compared to anticipatory..., Fabio Checconi, (Sat May 10, 5:56 pm)
speck-geostationary