On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:38 PM Richard Shaw <hobbes1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:01 PM Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> wrote:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851783
>> The main argument is that for typical and varied workloads in Fedora,
>> mostly on consumer hardware, we should use mq-deadline scheduler
>> rather than either none or bfq.
>> It may be true most folks with NVMe won't see anything bad with none,
>> but those who have heavier IO workloads are likely to be better off
>> with mq-deadline.
> How would one go about forcing the scheduler as to experiment to see if there 
> is any perceived difference between them?

# echo 'mq-deadline' > /sys/block/mmcblk0/queue/scheduler
# cat /sys/block/mmcblk0/queue/scheduler

I expect none and mq-deadline come up about the same unless you're
doing concurrent heavy IO tasks, and in that case good chance one of
them gets IO starved if you use none.

Chris Murphy
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 

Reply via email to