Re: performance "regression" in cfq compared to anticipatory, deadlineand noop

[Aaron Carroll]

Matthew wrote:
> > 2) Does using a bigger value of slice_idle increase the throughput?
>
> [..]
>
> 2) a bigger value even made it worse, setting it to "0" however
> seemingly "fixed" it, I however don't know how the overall
> effect/impact is, this will need some more real-world testing ;)

As Fabio said, you may lose throughput if you have multiple processes
with at least one sync. seq. reader.  However, for other workloads, you
should see a large global throughput improvement.  This is because CFQ
tends to idle without too much regard to thinktime or seekiness, often
wasting a few ms.  The trade-off is that your slow sync. processes may
suffer a little.

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