Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity?
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 19:21:35
Message-Id: icu9sj$8he$1@dough.gmane.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity? by walt
1 On 11/28/2010 07:39 PM, walt wrote:
2 > On 11/27/2010 11:17 PM, App Deb wrote:
3 >> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Nikos Chantziaras<realnc@×××××.de>
4 >> wrote:
5 >>> On 11/28/2010 01:03 AM, Stroller wrote:
6 >>>>
7 >>>> On 27/11/2010, at 10:22pm, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
8 >>>>>
9 >>>>> The ck patch set does not support group scheduling anyway;
10 >>>>
11 >>>> Now I'm a little more confused. Does `ionice` need the CFQ scheduler?
12 >>>
13 >>> Nope. I/O scheduling priorities are part of the I/O scheduler, not
14 >>> the CPU
15 >>> scheduler.
16 >>
17 >> CFQ is the official I/O scheduler.
18 >>
19 >> ionice only works with CFQ.
20 >
21 > I'm confused about which of all these various mechanisms apply to
22 > single-cpu
23 > machines. AFAICT Con's BFS (e.g.) is really a CPU scheduler and doesn't
24 > affect
25 > single-cpu machines very much.
26
27 The scheduler affects every system. Single-CPU systems also need to
28 schedule processes.
29
30 Anyway, did the ck kernel help in some way with your problem?

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity? Stroller <stroller@××××××××××××××××××.uk>