DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        b=GKrjc5RPV9RFtj21u5fhdrq99pbO/ajmv8ePNzaMq/JxEiPsii1MrwTJCN9KYp7vkQ
         ipFEyOIb0ta5yEWbSdZbR12qvqy2YXrhVYUbQnNsOgw+gFCVpWjeVn0CjDZRPB4DWEwt
         9uMvgcwlB5axe1d/y5H3kFyT6/VVclO+kYcPo=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 22:55:47 +0100
Message-ID: <4dcf7d360901301355l7ed26a5aob7ef6d79d9607b6b@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: SSD and IO schedulers
From: Lorenzo Allegrucci <l.allegrucci@gmail.com>
To: jens.axboe@oracle.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 670
Lines: 17

Hi, I was wondering how IO schedulers such as as-iosched, deadline and
cfq behave on SSD
(that have virtually no seek time), from a theoretical point of view.
How do they affect
performance on these devices?
I heard that the noop scheduler is often chosen by owners of EeePcs
(with a SSD unit).
They report superior performance by using this (quite simple) scheduler.
Are there any scientific benchmarks around?

-- 
Lorenzo
--
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/