linux-ext4 - Re: benchmark results

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:01:37 -0800 (PST)
From:	Christian Kujau <lists@...dbynature.de>
To:	Teran McKinney <sega01@...il.com>
cc:	reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: benchmark results

[cut a few Cc's]

On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 at 12:59, Teran McKinney wrote:
> Which I/O scheduler are you using? Pretty sure that ReiserFS is a
> little less deadlocky with CFQ or another over deadline, but that
> deadline usually gives the best results for me (especially for JFS).

Yes, I'm using the deadline scheduler - it was my understanding that it's 
usually best when I/O throughput is an issue. If reiserfs is "less 
deadlocky" with other schedulers, maybe it should depend on 
!IOSCHED_DEADLINE then or something :)

Christian.
-- 
BOFH excuse #19:

floating point processor overflow
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html