From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 15:23:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 15:23:17 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:10453 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 15:23:16 -0400 Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 21:26:53 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: "Randy.Dunlap" Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/elevator updates + deadline i/o scheduler Message-ID: <20020728212653.B3460@suse.de> References: <20020728211204.A3203@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 28 2002, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Jens Axboe wrote: > > | Cool. I'd be interested in latency and throughput results at this point, > | I have none of these. BTW, does anyone know of a good benchmark that > | also cares about latency? > > Danger, use of 'good' and 'benchmark' together. :-) > Nevertheless, tiobench (tiobench.sf.net) tries to care about & > measure latency. Does it? Hmm my version is probably too old then, thanks for the hint, I'll try it first thing tomorrow. -- Jens Axboe