On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 02:10:06PM -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 07/01/2010 02:04 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > Resending this mail. This time also CCing linux-scsi mailing list. Sorry > > for the duplicate copy. > > > > Hi, > > > > I wanted to attend LSF 2010. Sepcifically I was interested in discussing > > couple of things. > > > > - CFQ performance issues on higher end storage > > - Deadline outperforms CFQ on higher end storage (storage arrays > > and also on host based hardware RAID). I was wondering if there > > is a way to fix it or it is just design limitation. In the past > > Jens had mentioned that he wants to get rid of deadline also and > > be replaced with CFQ. Are we still targeting that and if yes, > > how to achieve that (some kind of auto tuning). > > > > - Max bandwidth IO controller > > - A basic proportional weight controller (blkio) based off CFQ is > > now in. Now there is also a need to implement throttling/max > > bandwidth controller. Wanted to get some ideas on how to go > > go about it and what is the best place to impement it. Implement > > it in CFQ or a new device mapper target or something else. > > > > Thanks > > Vivek > > > > Thanks Vivek, > > I know that this IO scheduling issue has been a hot issue for us in our > performance testing. We would love to figure out how to get CFQ to displace > deadline totally and definitely it would be very interesting to have a > conversation around what needs done/what can be done. > I'll second that...one scheduler to rule them all. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
