From: arlie@worldash.org (Arlie Stephens)
To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org
Subject: Linux elevators (Re: BFQ: simple elevator)
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:05:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130320230509.GA11275@worldash.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14506.1363813419@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
The ongoing thread reminds me of a simple question I've had since I
first read about linux' mutiple I/O schedulers. Why is the choice of
I/O scheduler global to the whole kernel, rather than per-device or
similar?
Consider a system with both traditional rotating disks and SSDs - not
at all far fetched. An appropriate I/O scheduling algorithm for
rotating disks is likely to do a lot of work that's useless for
SSDs. Why require that the same algorithms be used for both?
--
Arlie
(Arlie Stephens arlie at worldash.org)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-20 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-20 15:54 BFQ: simple elevator Raymond Jennings
2013-03-20 19:24 ` Mulyadi Santosa
2013-03-20 21:03 ` Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
2013-03-20 21:41 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-20 23:10 ` Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
2013-03-20 23:37 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-21 9:13 ` Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
2013-03-21 9:37 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-22 3:52 ` Mulyadi Santosa
2013-03-22 20:50 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-22 20:53 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-22 21:20 ` Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
2013-03-23 0:05 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-23 16:42 ` Matthias Brugger
2013-03-25 19:15 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-25 22:27 ` Matthias Brugger
2013-03-25 22:29 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-23 1:42 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-23 14:38 ` Matthias Brugger
2013-03-25 18:19 ` Raymond Jennings
2013-03-20 23:05 ` Arlie Stephens [this message]
2013-03-20 23:16 ` Linux elevators (Re: BFQ: simple elevator) Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
2013-03-20 23:45 ` Arlie Stephens
2013-03-21 1:00 ` Raymond Jennings
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=20130320230509.GA11275@worldash.org \
--to=arlie@worldash.org \
--cc=kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.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.