Am Mittwoch, 29. August 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> On 8/28/2012 2:01 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Hi Stan,
> > Am Montag, 27. August 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> >> For a desktop user workload, there will be no noticeable performance
> >> difference, because such applications don't do parallel IO.
> > Are you sure about 1) desktop applications I/O behavior and 2) NCQ?
> > 1) I see noticeable difference for my Intel SSD 320 with different
> > iodepth values in fio job.
> Shall we now split hairs, and have a 500 post discussion WRT the
> definition of "desktop user workload"?
> If you consider fio, iozone, bonnie++ etc to be part of a typical
> "desktop user workload" then you're simply out of touch with the real
> world Martin.
> Do you have a father/mother brother/sister wife/children? Do any of
> them run fio on a regular basis? These people represent the typical
> "desktop user workload". Sysadmins, devs, power users, do not.
While a typical desktop workload may not induce anything near an IO depth
of 64, I still think several desktop applications accessing the disk at
once can have the Linux kernel block layer use an iodepth > 1 on the disk.
So maybe testing with I/O depth upto 10 or so make sense even for desktop
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com