From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261168AbULHJhJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2004 04:37:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261170AbULHJhJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2004 04:37:09 -0500 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:64984 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261168AbULHJhB (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2004 04:37:01 -0500 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:35:52 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrew Morton , Andrea Arcangeli , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Time sliced CFQ io scheduler Message-ID: <20041208093552.GK19522@suse.de> References: <20041202195232.GA26695@suse.de> <20041208003736.GD16322@dualathlon.random> <1102467253.8095.10.camel@npiggin-nld.site> <20041208013732.GF16322@dualathlon.random> <20041207180033.6699425b.akpm@osdl.org> <20041208065534.GF3035@suse.de> <1102489719.8095.56.camel@npiggin-nld.site> <20041208071141.GB19522@suse.de> <1102490389.8095.69.camel@npiggin-nld.site> <20041208072616.GD19522@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041208072616.GD19522@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 08 2004, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Hmm, damn. Lots of stuff. I guess some of the notable ones that I've > > had trouble with are OraSim (Oracle might give you a copy), Andrew's > > patch scripts when applying a stack of patches, pgbench... can't > > really remember any others off the top of my head. > > The patch scripts case is interesting, last night (when committing other > patches) I was thinking I should try and bench that today. It has a good > mix of reads and writes. AS is currently 10 seconds faster for that workload (untar of a kernel and then applying 2237 patches). AS completes it in 155 seconds, CFQ takes 164 seconds. I still need to fix the streamed write perfomance regression, then I'll see how the above compares again. CFQ doesn't do very well in eg tiobench streamed write case (it's about 30% slower than AS). (btw, any mention of CFQ in this thread refers to time sliced cfq). -- Jens Axboe