axboe@suse.de said:
>> By all means, do the same thing with disk i/o. It's been a smashing
>> success with packet queueing.
>
> Well, that's the point.
Yes, what you've done with cbq is great. What I was referring to,
though, is the user configurability of network frame queueing. It's
possible to do really complex things for very specialized needs, yet
also easy to put in a simple tweak if there's just one type of traffic
you need to prioritize. It'd be nice to have that kind of
configurability for unusual i/o loads, and the arbitrary queue stacking
is a whole different beast than having a couple of tunables to tweak.
Jason
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 15 2003 - 22:00:35 EST