| 1 |
2010/1/5 Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>: |
| 2 |
> On Tuesday 05 January 2010 10:15:00 Stroller wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 5 Jan 2010, at 06:21, Mick wrote: |
| 4 |
>> >> ... |
| 5 |
>> >> Solved. The problem was CFQ I/O scheduler. It was several times slower |
| 6 |
>> >> than the others, for whatever reason. |
| 7 |
>> >> ... |
| 8 |
>> > |
| 9 |
>> > Hmmm ... reading at the help files I thought that CFQ was the |
| 10 |
>> > default/best option for a desktop. Is there such a thing as a best fit |
| 11 |
>> > here? |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> I had this notion that it was the worst option for everything, unless your |
| 14 |
>> computer has 96+ CPUs. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I had this notion that the author of the help files was talking through a hole |
| 17 |
> in his butt and just expressing his own views. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Ha, ha! |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
What does experience show to be a best option for a desktop that has: |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
a) Single CPU? |
| 24 |
b) Dual core? |
| 25 |
c) Quad core? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Regards, |
| 29 |
Mick |
Archives