On Thursday 13 December 2007, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote: > On Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007, Jason Carson wrote: > > I was reading this article (http://lwn.net/Articles/114770/) which > > says... > > > > AS (Anticipatory Scheduler) still seems to be better for desktop systems > > and IDE disks > > > > ... I have a server, not a desktop system but am using an IDE disk so > > which scheduler is better for a server. Should I stay with anticipatory > > because I am using an IDE disk or switch to something else because my > > system is a server? > > this article is acient. > > Nowadays CFQ and deadline are the best choices. CFQ is the best choice for > most desktops and most servers and for some servers and some selected > desktops deadline is the best choice. > > Why not built all three and switch between them with the apropriate kernel > command line. That way you can easily test which one is the best for you.
How would you go about testing each? -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
