On 19.08.2013, Mihai T. Lazarescu wrote: > It appears that CFQ can sense and adapt to SSD and has little > if any loss to other I/O schedulers: > http://www.velobit.com/storage-performance-blog/bid/126135/Effects-Of-Linux-IO-Scheduler-On-SSD-Performance They only tested bandwidth, not latency. On my systems, deadline outperforms cfq, both wrt bandwidth *and* latency, both felt and measured. Latency is especially sensible when there's a lot of disk I/O. You can do some testing using Ted Tso's fsync-tester: https://oss.oracle.com/~mason/fsync-tester.c -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
