From: Heinz Diehl <htd@fancy-poultry.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Corrado Zoccolo" <czoccolo@gmail.com>,
"J.A. Magallón" <jamagallon@ono.com>,
"Jan Knutar" <jk-lkml@sci.fi>
Subject: Re: SSD and IO schedulers
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 21:56:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090408195610.GA5447@fancy-poultry.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4e5e476b0904081218i29871702qc8bacb680c51ec2c@mail.gmail.com>
On 08.04.2009, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> I found that elevator=deadline performs much better than noop for
> writes, and almost as well for reads
[....]
The DL elevator has slightly more throughput than cfq and anticipatory,
but is almost unusuable under load.
Running Theodore Ts'os "fsync-tester" while doing Linus' torture test
"while : ; do time sh -c "dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=8M count=256 ; sync; rm bigfile"; done"
shows it clearly:
mount: /dev/sda4 on /home type xfs (rw,noatime,logbsize=256k,logbufs=2,nobarrier)
Kernel 2.6.29.1 (vanilla)
with cfq:
htd@liesel:~/!> ./fsync-tester
fsync time: 0.7640
fsync time: 0.6166
fsync time: 1.2830
fsync time: 0.4273
fsync time: 1.1693
fsync time: 1.7466
fsync time: 1.2477
fsync time: 1.9411
fsync time: 1.9636
fsync time: 1.9065
fsync time: 1.1561
fsync time: 1.8267
fsync time: 0.2431
fsync time: 0.2898
fsync time: 0.2394
fsync time: 0.4309
fsync time: 1.5699
fsync time: 0.3742
fsync time: 1.3194
fsync time: 1.9442
fsync time: 1.0899
fsync time: 1.9443
fsync time: 1.0062
with dl:
fsync time: 10.5853
fsync time: 10.3339
fsync time: 5.3374
fsync time: 6.5707
fsync time: 10.6095
fsync time: 4.1154
fsync time: 4.9604
fsync time: 10.5325
fsync time: 10.4543
fsync time: 10.4970
fsync time: 10.5570
fsync time: 5.2717
fsync time: 10.5619
fsync time: 5.3058
fsync time: 3.1019
fsync time: 5.1504
fsync time: 5.7564
fsync time: 10.5998
fsync time: 4.0895
Regards, Heinz.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-08 19:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-30 21:55 SSD and IO schedulers Lorenzo Allegrucci
2009-01-31 8:45 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-31 10:42 ` Alan Jenkins
2009-02-03 23:40 ` J.A. Magallón
2009-02-07 16:58 ` Jan Knutar
2009-04-08 19:18 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-04-08 19:56 ` Heinz Diehl [this message]
2009-04-08 20:18 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-04-09 10:33 ` Heinz Diehl
2009-04-09 10:50 ` Heinz Diehl
2009-04-09 23:56 ` Bill Davidsen
2009-04-10 5:57 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-10 12:46 ` Bill Davidsen
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=20090408195610.GA5447@fancy-poultry.org \
--to=htd@fancy-poultry.org \
--cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
--cc=jamagallon@ono.com \
--cc=jk-lkml@sci.fi \
--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