Re: Which I/O scheduler is Fedora switching to in 4.21? mq-deadline or BFQ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




> Il giorno 5 mar 2019, alle ore 21:13, stan <upaitag@xxxxxxxx> ha scritto:
> 
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 17:42:12 +0100
> Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> At any rate, let me take this opportunity for updating you guys on
>> what happened in the last months.
>> 
>> First, server-side, I discovered that the techniques used to guarantee
>> I/O bandwidth to clients, containers and virtual machines easily
>> result in throughput losses of up to 90%!  So I improved BFQ so as to
>> make it an alternative solution that brings this loss down to just
>> 10%.  Full details in this very recent (today :) ) short article:
>> http://ow.ly/vsrW50mBAGl
>> 
>> Second, PC-side, I've pushed new commits for the dev version of BFQ
>> (I'll submit these commits for the production version, probably
>> tomorrow; so they'll probably be all available from 5.2).  These
>> commits provide the following, measurable performance boost:
>> - up to ~80% faster application start-up times in the presence of
>>  background workloads
>> - ~150% throughput boost in one of the nastiest workloads for BFQ the
>>  one generated by dbench.  The throughput is finally on pr with any
>>  other I/O scheduler, and most likely equal to the maximum possible
>>  throughput reachable with this test
>> - elimination of the 18% loss of throughput occurring with only
>>  random reads, w.r.t.  to none as I/O scheduler; there is no loss any
>>  more;
> 
> This sounds great!  Thanks for the update.  Looking forward to 5.2.

If you are curious, here's the performance you will enjoy from 5.2,
and, partially, already from 5.1 (tested through the dev version of
bfq on top of a 4.19):
https://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/disk_sched/results.php

Unless 5.2 will be as broken as 5.0 currently is! ;)

Thanks,
Paolo

> _______________________________________________
> kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora General Discussion]     [Older Fedora Users Archive]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Coolkey]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [USB]     [Asterisk PBX]

  Powered by Linux