

Linux I/O Scheduler Comparison On The Linux 3.4 Desktop - Tsiolkovsky
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_iosched_2012

======
conorh
This may be a great article, but the effort of parsing through the number of
ads and highlighted words on the page made me give up trying to read it after
the first two paragraphs. Not to hijack this posting, but can this amount of
advertising really work for a content site? It seems like it would drive away
most readers.

~~~
MBCook
Unfortunately, this seems to be a standard Phoronix article.

They picked an interesting topic and ran some benchmarks. In some cases the
older CFQ scheduler is much slower than the NOP scheduler. In others, the
Deadline scheduler pulls way ahead.

The analysis in the article is essentially the paragraph I wrote above. No
discussion of why one scheduler may be performing so much better/worse in one
case. In fact, there is only a single sentence description of each scheduler.

------
hello_asdf
Where does BFQ fit into this? I've been using it as my I/O scheduler and I've
noticed significant lag when I'm transferring large amounts of data between
drives. Any thoughts on this? I've been thinking of switching back, but would
love some thoughts on it's performance capabilities.

