From: Dave Olien <dmo@osdl.org>
To: Diego Calleja <grundig@teleline.es>
Cc: Michael Frank <mhf@linuxmail.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ext2/3 performance regression in 2.6 vs 2.4 for small interleaved writes
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:00:19 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040212020019.GA22344@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040211221806.106eed62.grundig@teleline.es>
2.4 does not have deadline scheduler. But the 2.6 deadline scheduler
is more similar to 2.4's scheduler than is the anticipatory scheduler.
Re-try 2.6 with deadline scheduler will remove some of the additional
scheduler policies that are present in the anticipatory scheduler.
On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 10:18:06PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote:
> El Thu, 12 Feb 2004 05:02:39 +0800 Michael Frank <mhf@linuxmail.org> escribió:
>
>
> > 2.4 has a deadline scheduler. 2.6 default is anticipatory.
>
> I though the 2.4 io scheduler wasn't "deadline" base, I think the first
> "deadline" io scheduler was the one merged ~2.5.39
>
> -
> 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/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-12 2:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-11 19:04 ext2/3 performance regression in 2.6 vs 2.4 for small interleaved writes Jon Burgess
2004-02-11 20:28 ` Rik van Riel
2004-02-11 21:02 ` Michael Frank
2004-02-11 21:18 ` Diego Calleja
2004-02-12 2:00 ` Dave Olien [this message]
2004-02-12 2:23 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-02-12 9:42 ` ext2/3 performance regression in 2.6 vs 2.4 for small interl Giuliano Pochini
2004-02-12 10:15 ` John Bradford
2004-02-12 10:27 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-12 17:05 ` Michael Frank
2004-02-12 17:18 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-02-12 20:55 ` Helge Hafting
2004-02-13 1:57 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-02-13 2:05 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-12 14:59 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-02-13 12:15 ` ext2/3 performance regression in 2.6 vs 2.4 for small interleaved writes Jon Burgess
2004-02-12 10:40 ` Jon Burgess
2004-02-12 20:17 ` Hans Reiser
2004-02-12 9:56 ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-12 20:20 ` Jon Burgess
2004-02-13 8:28 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2004-02-16 17:51 ` Alex Zarochentsev
2004-02-16 20:03 ` Jon Burgess
2004-02-13 12:35 ` Jon Burgess
2004-02-14 15:00 ` Jon Burgess
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040212020019.GA22344@osdl.org \
--to=dmo@osdl.org \
--cc=grundig@teleline.es \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhf@linuxmail.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.