[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Lower HD transfer rate with NCQ enabled?
    >>Q: What conclusion can I make on "hdparm -t" results or can I make any 
    >>conclusions? Do I really have lower performance with NCQ or not? If I do,
    >>is this because of my HD or because of kernel?
    >What IO scheduler are you using? If AS or CFQ, could you try with deadline?

    I was using CFQ. I now tried with Deadline and that doesn't seem to degrade
    the performance at all! With Deadline I got 60MB/s both with and without
    NCQ. This was with "hdparm -t".

    So what does this tell us?

    Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-04-03 23:33    [W:0.018 / U:18.464 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site