From: Mark Lord <kernel@teksavvy.com>
To: stan@hardwarefreak.com
Cc: cwillu <cwillu@cwillu.com>, Joe Ceklosky <jfceklosky@gmail.com>,
"linux-ide@vger.kernel.org >> IDE/ATA development list"
<linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: SSD slowdown with 3.3.X?
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:44:44 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F954EBC.8060508@teksavvy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F92FCA9.8010502@hardwarefreak.com>
On 12-04-21 02:30 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 4/21/2012 6:45 AM, cwillu wrote:
>>> Probably not relevant in this case but maybe worth mentioning to get the
>>> word out:
>>>
>>> "As of kernel 3.2.12, the default i/o scheduler, CFQ, will defeat much
>>> of the parallelization in XFS."
>>>
>>> http://www.xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ
>>
>> Not that it's terribly relevant to btrfs, but do you have a better
>> citation for that than a very recent one-line wiki change that only
>> cites the user's own anecdote?
>
> Apologies for the rather weak citation. It was simply easier to quote
> that wiki entry.
>
> How about something directly from Dave's fingers:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/xfs/msg10824.html
>
> The many issues with CFQ+XFS didn't start with 3.2.12, but long before that.
Thanks for the link. That's handy to know.
The problems there are for XFS+RAID vs. CFQ, not XFS by itself.
Enterprise servers will normally have RAID under XFS,
but not all smaller systems.
Cheers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-23 12:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-19 2:15 SSD slowdown with 3.3.X? Joe Ceklosky
2012-04-19 3:13 ` Mark Lord
2012-04-20 15:23 ` Jeff Moyer
[not found] ` <4F90C4CF.1010000@gmail.com>
2012-04-21 2:40 ` Mark Lord
2012-04-21 2:43 ` Mark Lord
2012-04-21 3:53 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-04-21 11:45 ` cwillu
2012-04-21 18:30 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-04-23 12:44 ` Mark Lord [this message]
2012-04-25 0:22 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-04-23 14:11 ` Jeff Moyer
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=4F954EBC.8060508@teksavvy.com \
--to=kernel@teksavvy.com \
--cc=cwillu@cwillu.com \
--cc=jfceklosky@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stan@hardwarefreak.com \
/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.