On 4/21/2012 6:45 AM, cwillu wrote: >> Probably not relevant in this case but maybe worth mentioning to get the >> word out: >> >> "As of kernel 3.2.12, the default i/o scheduler, CFQ, will defeat much >> of the parallelization in XFS." >> >> http://www.xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ > > Not that it's terribly relevant to btrfs, but do you have a better > citation for that than a very recent one-line wiki change that only > cites the user's own anecdote? Apologies for the rather weak citation. It was simply easier to quote that wiki entry. How about something directly from Dave's fingers: http://www.spinics.net/lists/xfs/msg10824.html The many issues with CFQ+XFS didn't start with 3.2.12, but long before that. -- Stan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
