On 22:11 Mon 17 Dec , Mick wrote:
> On Sunday 16 December 2007, forgottenwizard wrote:
> OK then, I have been using CFQ for the last few days and it 'feels' slower
> (when e.g. I fire up Kmail, Opera and aterm in quick succession) relative to
> anticipatory which I was using before.
> --
> R
On Sunday 16 December 2007, forgottenwizard wrote:
> On 18:36 Sun 16 Dec , Mick wrote:
> > On Saturday 15 December 2007, forgottenwizard wrote:
> > > On 15:27 Thu 13 Dec , Jason Carson wrote:
> > > > Greetings,
> > > >
> > > > Where in the kernel config (make menuconfig) do I find the choic
On 18:36 Sun 16 Dec , Mick wrote:
> On Saturday 15 December 2007, forgottenwizard wrote:
> > On 15:27 Thu 13 Dec , Jason Carson wrote:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > Where in the kernel config (make menuconfig) do I find the choice for
> > > schedulers. The one I am currently using is "Antici
On Saturday 15 December 2007, forgottenwizard wrote:
> On 15:27 Thu 13 Dec , Jason Carson wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Where in the kernel config (make menuconfig) do I find the choice for
> > schedulers. The one I am currently using is "Anticipatory". What is the
> > newest and latest schedul
On 15:27 Thu 13 Dec , Jason Carson wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Where in the kernel config (make menuconfig) do I find the choice for
> schedulers. The one I am currently using is "Anticipatory". What is the
> newest and latest scheduler for 2.6.23?
>
> Regards,
>
> Jason Carson
>
> --
> [EMAIL
On Freitag, 14. Dezember 2007, Mick wrote:
> 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 seem
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
>
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:39:11 -0500
"Andrey Falko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You probably want to use CFQ as it is currently the fastest
It is? I though anticipatory was still considered the fastest.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Freitag, 14. Dezember 2007, Joshua Doll wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007, Joshua Doll wrote:
> >> Jason Carson wrote:
> >>> I was reading this article (http://lwn.net/Articles/114770/) which
> >>> says...
> >>>
> >>> AS (Anticipatory Scheduler) still see
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007, Joshua Doll wrote:
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,
On Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007, Joshua Doll wrote:
> 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
On Dec 13, 2007 3:57 PM, Jason Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was reading this article (http://lwn.net/Articles/114770/) which says...
>
The article is very old, take a look at this, newer one:
http://www.redhat.com/magazine/008jun05/features/schedulers/
>
> AS (Anticipatory Scheduler) sti
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. Sho
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
>
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 antici
071213 Jason Carson wrote:
> Where in 'make menuconfig' do I find the choice for schedulers.
> The one I am currently using is "Anticipatory".
> What is the newest and latest scheduler for 2.6.23?
Try '/sched', which will get you started & lead you to
'Enable block layer -> IO Schedulers -> whate
On Dec 13, 2007 3:27 PM, Jason Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Where in the kernel config (make menuconfig) do I find the choice for
> schedulers. The one I am currently using is "Anticipatory". What is the
> newest and latest scheduler for 2.6.23?
>
> Regards,
>
> Jason Carson
Greetings,
Where in the kernel config (make menuconfig) do I find the choice for
schedulers. The one I am currently using is "Anticipatory". What is the
newest and latest scheduler for 2.6.23?
Regards,
Jason Carson
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
18 matches
Mail list logo
