On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. That is a somewhat odd suggestion. It's a runtime tunable for a reason. No default will ever work for 100% of the cases Fedora may be used in. Rather than go through all the effort of making a decision for all of Fedora at the FESCo level, I would prefer the Workgroups look at what their target machine types are and come up with a default they would prefer to see. Then they can work on setting it at boot via an Edition specific setting. josh _______________________________________________ desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
