Andrew Morton wrote:
Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- The effects of tcq on AS are much less disastrous than I thought they
> were. Do I have the wrong workload? Memory fails me. Or did we fix the
> anticipatory scheduler?
>
>
Yes, we did fix it ;)
Quite a long time ago, so maybe you are thinking of something else
(I haven't been able to work it out).
Steve Pratt's ols2004 presentation made AS look pretty bad. However the
numbers in the proceedings
(http://www.finux.org/proceedings/LinuxSymposium2004_V2.pdf) are much less
stark.
Steve, what's up with that? The slides which you talked to had some awful
numbers. Was it the same set of tests?
I highlighted a few cases where AS went really wrong during the
presentation, like on really large RAID 0 arrays, but in general
(referring back to slides) AS trailed other schedulers by 5-10% on ext3,
but had real trouble with XFS, losing by as much as %145 on 5disk raid5
system for a mix of workloads. Perhaps this is the piece you remember.
Steve
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
