From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Nelson Subject: Ceph Bobtail Performance: IO Scheduler Comparison Article Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 10:03:30 -0600 Message-ID: <50FEB852.7030406@inktank.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-ie0-f182.google.com ([209.85.223.182]:45478 "EHLO mail-ie0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753531Ab3AVQDV (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:03:21 -0500 Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id s9so11949907iec.13 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 08:03:20 -0800 (PST) Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" Hi Guys, We've got an article up looking at performance of CFQ, Deadline, and NOOP IO schedulers with Ceph on the SAS2208. I won't claim that these results are universally applicable to other controllers and disk setups, but they might be interesting if you've been trying to determine what scheduler to use with your setup. http://ceph.com/community/ceph-bobtail-performance-io-scheduler-comparison/ Thanks, Mark