Linux I/O schedulers benchmarked - anticipatory vs CFQ vs deadline vs noop

Written by Gionatan Danti on . Posted in Linux & Unix

User Rating:  / 23
PoorBest 

Conclusions

I found very instructive to play with the Linux I/O schedulers.

While in many tests they show similar results, it really seems that CFQ and deadline have an edge over the old, legacy anticipatory scheduler.

In the end,the move to CFQ (the standard scheduler in recent kernels) was a sensible one. Anyone wanting to squeeze a little more performance from its disk subsystem can either fine-tune the CFQ scheduler or use the deadline one. For example, some interesting consideration can be found here.

Feel free to discuss this article with me writing at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Have a nice day!

Comments   

 
#1 Ren 2013-11-22 07:11
Thanks for this very interesting post. Perhaps you could benchmark the different schedulers including BFQ (http://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/disk_sched/) next time?
 

You have no rights to post comments