Re: Linux I/O schedulers - CFQ & random seeks

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

 



On 03/04/11 10:34, Glyn Astill wrote:
> I'm wondering (and this may be a can of worms) what peoples opinions are on these schedulers?

When testing our new DB box just last month, we saw a big improvement in bonnie++ random I/O rates when using the noop scheduler instead of cfq (or any other). We've got RAID 10/12 on a 3ware card w/ battery-backed cache; 7200rpm drives. Our file system is XFS with noatime,nobarrier,logbufs=8,logbsize=256k. How much is "big?" I can't find my notes for it, but I recall that the difference was large enough to surprise us. We're running with noop in production right now. No complaints.

--
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