Re: Linux I/O tuning: CFQ vs. deadline

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Greg Smith wrote:
> Recently I've made a number of unsubstantiated claims that the deadline 
> scheduler on Linux does bad things compared to CFQ when running 
> real-world mixed I/O database tests.  Unfortunately every time I do one 
> of these I end up unable to release the results due to client 
> confidentiality issues.  However, I do keep an eye out for people who 
> run into the same issues in public benchmarks, and I just found one:  
> http://insights.oetiker.ch/linux/fsopbench/

That is interesting; particularly since I have made one quite different
experience in which deadline outperformed CFQ by a factor of approximately 4.

So I tried to look for differences, and I found two possible places:
- My test case was read-only, our production system is read-mostly.
- We did not have a RAID array, but a SAN box (with RAID inside).

The "noop" scheduler performed about as well as "deadline".
I wonder if the two differences above could explain the different
result.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux