Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.{18,19{-ck9},20rc1{-aa1}} with contest

From: Andrea Arcangeli (andrea@suse.de)
Date: Mon Nov 11 2002 - 10:48:02 EST


On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 03:09:20PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> latency view point. This is also why the 2.5 deadline io scheduler is
> far superior in this area.

going in function of time is even better of course, but just assuming
bytes to be a linear function of time would be a good start, it depends
if you want to backport the deadline I/O scheduler to 2.4 or not. I
think going in terms of bytes would be simpler for 2.4. We're going to
use 2.4 for at least one more year in some production environment, so I
think it could make sense to address this, at least to be a function of
bytes if not of time.

Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 15 2002 - 22:00:22 EST