Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Why? (Score 5, Informative) 65

And why are they going thorough the trouble of removing improvements from CFQ?

CFQ was never very good, Lots of quirky behaviour, often being worse than the NOOP scheduler and sometimes stuffing up completely. This is a nice polite way of taking it out behind the barn and shooting it. The new one turns in massive improvements in read latency, respectable improvement in other loads, and little to no regression on any load, besides being thought through and 1,000,000 times better documented than the old steaming pile.

Slashdot Top Deals

The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was.

Working...