[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703270554320.31853@p34.internal.lan>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 05:55:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why is NCQ enabled by default by libata? (2.6.20)
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 12:38:02 -0400 (EDT)
> Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com> wrote:
>
>> Without NCQ, performance is MUCH better on almost every operation, with
>> the exception of 2-3 items.
>
> It depends on the drive. Generally NCQ is better but some drive firmware
> isn't too bright and there are probably still cases where we get bad
> interactions in the kernel code that want tuning too
>
Checking the benchmarks on various hardware websites, anandtech,
hothardware and others, they generally all come to the same conclusion if
there is only 1 thread using I/O (single user system) then NCQ off is the
best. I see 30-50MB/s faster speeds with NCQ turned off on two different
SW RAID5s.
Justin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists