On Sat, Oct 03 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > Doesn't look too bad, all things considered. Apart from "stock" cfq, > > it's consistent. And being consistent is a Good Thing. Performance wise, > > it's losing out to "stock" but looks pretty competetive otherwise. > > I agree. And I think the numbers for the kconsole test are pretty > conclusive. That's a big improvement (on top of the already very > impressive improvement). Yes very much so. The tweaks are mostly straight forward, so my confidence in the end results from a "will this work" stand point is good. It will likely be somewhat slower for some things, but we can fix those up as we continue testing. I wont ask you to pull this yet, but I likely will next week when I've done some benchmarks with it for the other end of the spectrum. > > So far that looks like a winner. The dictator wanted good latency, he's > > getting good latency. I'll continue working on this on monday, while I'm > > waiting for delivery of the Trabant. > > Trabant? > > As in the car? > > Why would you _ever_ wait for delivery? The sane option would be to try to > hide, or run away? OK, so I'm not really waiting for a Trabant. I do have a car on order, but not a 2-stroke :-) -- Jens Axboe -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
