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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).