From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/elevator updates + deadline i/o scheduler
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 10:51:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020801085152.GC1096@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1020730132645.4849B-100000@gatekeeper.tmr.com>
On Tue, Jul 30 2002, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > Finally, I've done some testing on it. No testing on whether this really
> > works well in real life (that's what I want testers to do), and no
> > testing on benchmark performance changes etc. What I have done is
> > beat-up testing, making sure it works without corrupting your data. I'm
> > fairly confident that does. Most testing was on SCSI (naturally),
> > however IDE has also been tested briefly.
>
> First, great job on the explanation, it went right in my folder for "when
> the docs are clear" explanations.
Thanks :-)
> Now a request, if someone is running a database app and tests this I'd
> love to see the results. I expect things like LMbench to show more threads
> ending at the same time, but will it help a reall app?
Note that the deadline i/o scheduler only considers deadlines on
individual requests so far, so there's no real guarentee that process X,
Y, and Z will receive equal share of the bandwidth. This is something
I'm thinking about, though.
My testing does seem to indicate that the deadline scheduler is fairer
than the linus scheduler, but ymmv.
> I bet it was tested briefly on IDE, my last use of IDE a week or so ago
> lasted until I did "make dep" and the output went all over every attached
> drive :-( Still, nice to know it will work if IDE makes it into 2.5.
:/
I'll say that 2.5.29 IDE did work fine for the testing I did with the
deadline scheduler, at least it survived a dbench 64 (that's about the
testing it got).
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-08-01 8:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-26 12:02 [PATCH] block/elevator updates + deadline i/o scheduler Jens Axboe
2002-07-26 18:31 ` Andrew Morton
2002-07-28 19:12 ` Jens Axboe
2002-07-28 19:17 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-07-28 19:26 ` Jens Axboe
2002-07-30 7:57 ` Jens Axboe
2002-07-27 1:22 ` Adam Kropelin
2002-07-30 17:33 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-08-01 8:51 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2002-08-01 18:24 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-08-02 8:16 ` Jens Axboe
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=20020801085152.GC1096@suse.de \
--to=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox