1 |
On Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007, Jason Carson wrote: |
2 |
> I was reading this article (http://lwn.net/Articles/114770/) which says... |
3 |
> |
4 |
> AS (Anticipatory Scheduler) still seems to be better for desktop systems |
5 |
> and IDE disks |
6 |
> |
7 |
> ... I have a server, not a desktop system but am using an IDE disk so |
8 |
> which scheduler is better for a server. Should I stay with anticipatory |
9 |
> because I am using an IDE disk or switch to something else because my |
10 |
> system is a server? |
11 |
|
12 |
this article is acient. |
13 |
|
14 |
Nowadays CFQ and deadline are the best choices. CFQ is the best choice for |
15 |
most desktops and most servers and for some servers and some selected |
16 |
desktops deadline is the best choice. |
17 |
|
18 |
Why not built all three and switch between them with the apropriate kernel |
19 |
command line. That way you can easily test which one is the best for you. |
20 |
-- |
21 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |