Messages in this thread | | | From | Aaron Carroll <> | Date | Sun, 11 May 2008 10:00:59 +1000 | Subject | Re: performance "regression" in cfq compared to anticipatory, deadline and noop |
| |
Matthew wrote: >> 2) Does using a bigger value of slice_idle increase the throughput? > > [..] > > 2) a bigger value even made it worse, setting it to "0" however > seemingly "fixed" it, I however don't know how the overall > effect/impact is, this will need some more real-world testing ;)
As Fabio said, you may lose throughput if you have multiple processes with at least one sync. seq. reader. However, for other workloads, you should see a large global throughput improvement. This is because CFQ tends to idle without too much regard to thinktime or seekiness, often wasting a few ms. The trade-off is that your slow sync. processes may suffer a little.
-- Aaron
| |