Re: stochastic fair queueing in the elevator [Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.20-ck3 / aa / rmap with contest]

From: Rik van Riel (
Date: Mon Feb 10 2003 - 08:26:01 EST

On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 10:45:59PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > perspective it does nullify the need for readahead (though
> > it is obivously still needed for other reasons).
> I'm guessing that physically it may be needed from a head prospective
> too, I doubt it only has to do with the in-core overhead. Seeing it all
> before reaching the seek point might allow the disk to do smarter things

> NOTE: just to be sure, I'm not at all against anticpiatory scheduling,

Most disks seem to have a large cache, but with the cache unit
for most of the cache being one _track_ at a time.

This has the effect of the disk reading one track in at a time,
but only being able to cache a few of these tracks in its cache.

Anticipatory scheduling should reduce any thrashing of this disk



Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
Current spamtrap:  <a href=mailto:""></a>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 15 2003 - 22:00:28 EST