From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, jmoyer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3]block: An IOPS based ioscheduler
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 17:32:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120115223246.GC3174@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1326072405.22361.553.camel@sli10-conroe>
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 09:26:45AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
[..]
> > Could you for example compare a latency of reads while running heavy
> > background writing between CFQ and your scheduler? Loads like this where
> > original motivation for CFQ I believe.
> CFQ supports preemption, FIOPS doesn't, so I suppose read latency of CFQ
> is still better in such workload.
> In this initial post, I just want to demonstrate the basic idea of the
> ioscheduler. I'll post more data for both latency and throughput in next
> round.
I think before numbers what will be more helpful to know is that what are
you trying to achieve and why existing CFQ code can not do that with little
modification.
Thanks
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-15 22:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-04 6:53 [RFC 0/3]block: An IOPS based ioscheduler Shaohua Li
2012-01-04 6:53 ` [RFC 1/3]block: seperate CFQ io context management code Shaohua Li
2012-01-04 8:19 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-01-04 6:53 ` [RFC 2/3]block: FIOPS ioscheduler core Shaohua Li
2012-01-06 6:05 ` Namjae Jeon
2012-01-07 1:06 ` Zhu Yanhai
2012-01-04 6:53 ` [RFC 3/3]block: fiops read/write request scale Shaohua Li
2012-01-04 7:19 ` [RFC 0/3]block: An IOPS based ioscheduler Dave Chinner
2012-01-05 6:50 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-06 5:12 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-06 9:10 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-01-06 14:37 ` Jan Kara
2012-01-09 1:26 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-15 22:32 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2012-01-08 22:16 ` Dave Chinner
2012-01-09 1:09 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-15 22:45 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-16 4:36 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-16 7:11 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-16 7:55 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-16 8:29 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-17 1:06 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-17 9:02 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-18 1:20 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-18 13:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-19 1:21 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-15 22:28 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-06 9:41 ` Zhu Yanhai
2012-01-15 22:24 ` Vivek Goyal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120115223246.GC3174@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).