Comments on: The Linux disk scheduler: it sucks sticky balls http://rudd-o.com/archives/2007/07/18/the-linux-disk-scheduler-it-sucks-sticky-balls/ We only do fun stuff. Tue, 07 Oct 2008 05:54:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: isecore http://rudd-o.com/archives/2007/07/18/the-linux-disk-scheduler-it-sucks-sticky-balls/#comment-611268 isecore Mon, 11 Aug 2008 01:04:43 +0000 http://rudd-o.com/archives/2007/07/18/the-linux-disk-scheduler-it-sucks-sticky-balls/#comment-611268 <p>Thanks! Finally someone who has some insight into this debacle.</p> <p>I've been suffering horrible disk-performance for a while now and up until reading this not a single person I talked to had much of a clue as to the causes - speculations included everything from the filesystem to the kernel to the [whateverthingamajig] but no one was sure. It was all a wild goose-chase.</p> <p>Upgrading to a faster machine is for me simply not acceptable. Since when should a quad-core with 4 gigs of RAM run slower than cold molasses whenever a file is copied? Unacceptable!</p> <p>So thanks for this. Thanks for validating the issue and making it real for me, as well as providing some workarounds.</p> Thanks! Finally someone who has some insight into this debacle.

I’ve been suffering horrible disk-performance for a while now and up until reading this not a single person I talked to had much of a clue as to the causes - speculations included everything from the filesystem to the kernel to the [whateverthingamajig] but no one was sure. It was all a wild goose-chase.

Upgrading to a faster machine is for me simply not acceptable. Since when should a quad-core with 4 gigs of RAM run slower than cold molasses whenever a file is copied? Unacceptable!

So thanks for this. Thanks for validating the issue and making it real for me, as well as providing some workarounds.

]]>