lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: CFQ iosched praise: good perfomance and better latency
Pedro Larroy wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 04:12:56PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:

>>Well I think Pedro actually means *seconds*, not ms. The URL
>>shows AS peaks at nearly 10 seconds latency, and CFQ over 2s.
>
>
> Yes, I meant seconds, my mistake. I will be testing elevator=noop this
> evening.
>

That would be interesting.

>
>>It really seems like a raid problem though, because latency
>>measured at the individual devices is under 250ms for AS.
>
>
> Probably. But I was surprised to find that bonnie gave similar results
> with CFQ and with AS when benchmarking the swraid5.

I haven't used bonnie, but I think it is single threaded, isn't
it? If that is the case, then the IO scheduler will make little
or no difference, so your result is not surprising.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.061 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site