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
|  |