[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Some NCQ numbers...
Tejun Heo wrote:
> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> A test drive is Seagate Barracuda ST3250620AS "desktop" drive,
>> 250Gb, cache size is 16Mb, 7200RPM.
[test shows that NCQ makes no difference whatsoever]

> And which elevator?

Well. It looks like the results does not depend on the
elevator. Originally I tried with deadline, and just
re-ran the test with noop (hence the long delay with
the answer) - changing linux elevator changes almost
nothing in the results - modulo some random "fluctuations".

In any case, NCQ - at least in this drive - just does
not work. Linux with its I/O elevator may help to
speed things up a bit, but the disk does nothing in
this area. NCQ doesn't slow things down either - it
just does not work.

The same's for ST3250620NS "enterprise" drives.

By the way, Seagate announced Barracuda ES 2 series
(in range 500..1200Gb if memory serves) - maybe with
those, NCQ will work better?

Or maybe it's libata which does not implement NCQ
"properly"? (As I shown before, with almost all
ol'good SCSI drives TCQ helps alot - up to 2x the
difference and more - with multiple I/O threads)

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: 2007-07-03 22:33    [W:0.063 / U:7.204 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site