On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:38:31PM +0100, Jiri Eischmann wrote: > I briefly spoke with Jiri Hladky, the manager of the FS perf team in > Red Hat, and he says that deadline is clearly better for SSD. Results > for rotating disks are mixed, but he'd still prefer deadline there, > too. He can provide more detailed info if we need it. It's my understanding that CFQ is better in the case where you a) have a single spinning disk with b) mixed workload on top of that and c) care about overall throughput more than latency. An example might be if you are a budget hosting provider and are running multiple VMs on single-disk servers. If is preferred for lower latency on desktops, and is overall preferred for servers (a win on RAID, on SSD, and even on single-disk systems in many cases), switching to as across-the-board default deadline seems like the straightforward choice. I guess the next step is to engage the kernel team, and possibly FESCo since this is obviously a big engineering steering decision. And someone other than me can decide if this should be a Change. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
