Re: Bandwidth Allocations under CFQ I/O Scheduler

[Jakob Oestergaard]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 10:55:55PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
...
> So you could say you want your database to consume no more than 50%
> of disk and have your mp3 player get a minimum of 10%. Of course,
> that doesn't say anything about what the time slices are, or what
> latencies you can expect (1s out of every 10, or 100ms out of every
> 1000?).
> 
> It is still far from perfect, but at least it accounts for seeks vs
> throughput reasonably well, and in a device independent manner.

Yup - it makes sense.

It would make very good sense (to me at least) if you can say "give me
at least 100msec every 1sec", as was already suggested.  That would take
care of the latency problem too.

-- 

 / jakob

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/