Subject: Re: IO scheduler based IO controller V10
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
       Ulrich Lukas <stellplatz-nr.13a@datenparkplatz.de>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
       dm-devel@redhat.com, nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com,
       lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com,
       paolo.valente@unimore.it, ryov@valinux.co.jp, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp,
       jmoyer@redhat.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
       righi.andrea@gmail.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, agk@redhat.com,
       akpm@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org, jmarchan@redhat.com,
       riel@redhat.com
In-Reply-To: <20091002182608.GO31616@kernel.dk>
References: <20091002145610.GD31616@kernel.dk>
	 <alpine.LFD.2.01.0910020811490.6996@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20091002171129.GG31616@kernel.dk> <20091002172046.GA2376@elte.hu>
	 <20091002172554.GJ31616@kernel.dk> <20091002172842.GA4884@elte.hu>
	 <20091002173732.GK31616@kernel.dk> <20091002175629.GA14860@elte.hu>
	 <20091002180437.GL31616@kernel.dk>
	 <1254507754.8667.15.camel@marge.simson.net>
	 <20091002182608.GO31616@kernel.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 20:33:17 +0200
Message-Id: <1254508397.8667.24.camel@marge.simson.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1274
Lines: 29

On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 20:26 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 02 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 20:04 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm not too crazy about it either. How about just using 'desktop' since
> > > this is obviously what we are really targetting? 'latency' isn't fully
> > > descriptive either, since it may not necessarily provide the best single
> > > IO latency (noop would).
> > 
> > Grin. "Perfect is the enemy of good" :)
> >                                                   Avg
> >      16.24   175.82   154.38   228.97   147.16  144.5     noop
> >      43.23    57.39    96.13   148.25   180.09  105.0     deadline
> 
> Yep, that's where it falls down. Noop basically fails here because it
> treats all IO as equal, which obviously isn't true for most people. But
> even for pure read workloads (is the above the mixed read/write, or just
> read?), latency would be excellent with noop but the desktop experience
> would not.

Yeah, it's the dd vs konsole -e exit.

	-Mike

--
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/