Re: Linux I/O schedulers - CFQ & random seeks - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: Linux I/O schedulers - CFQ & random seeks
Date
Msg-id 4D70E3F4020000250003B4B1@gw.wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Linux I/O schedulers - CFQ & random seeks  (Dan Harris <fbsd@drivefaster.net>)
List pgsql-performance
Dan Harris <fbsd@drivefaster.net> wrote:

> Just another anecdote, I found that the deadline scheduler
> performed the best for me.  I don't have the benchmarks anymore
> but deadline vs cfq was dramatically faster for my tests.  I
> posted this to the list years ago and others announced similar
> experiences.  Noop was a close 2nd to deadline.

That was our experience when we benchmarked a few years ago.  Some
more recent benchmarks seem to have shown improvements in cfq, but
we haven't had enough of a problem with our current setup to make it
seem worth the effort of running another set of benchmarks on that.

-Kevin

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: Linux I/O schedulers - CFQ & random seeks
Next
From: Rosser Schwarz
Date:
Subject: Re: Linux I/O schedulers - CFQ & random seeks