Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 22:57:52 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: piotr@larroy.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CFQ iosched praise: good perfomance and better latency
Message-Id: <20040418225752.56d10695.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <40835F4E.5000308@yahoo.com.au>
References: <20040419005651.GA7860@larroy.com>
	<40835F4E.5000308@yahoo.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1155
Lines: 28

Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> Pedro Larroy wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > I've been trying CFQ ioscheduler in my software raid5 with nice results,
> > I've observed that a latency pattern still exists, just as in the
> > anticipatory ioscheduler, but those spikes are now much lower (from
> > 6ms with AS to 2ms with CFQ as seen in the bottom of
> > http://pedro.larroy.com/devel/iolat/analisys/),
> > plus apps seems to get a fair amount of io so they don't get starved.
> > 
> > Seems a good choice for io loaded boxes. Thanks Jens Axboe.
> > 
> 
> Although AS isn't at its best when behind raid devices (it should
> probably be in front of them), you could be seeing some problem
> with the raid code.
> 
> I'd be interested to see what the graph looks like with elevator=noop

This isn't a very surprising result, is it?  AS throws away latency to gain
throughput.  Pedro is measuring latency...
-
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/