Posted Aug 29, 2005 13:12 UTC (Mon) by joib
In reply to: CFQ priorities
Parent article: The 2.6.13 kernel is out
Were would it actually be needed?
My guess is that processes which are deemed important enough to get more cpu time also should get more I/O time and vice versa.
Or to put it another way, since I/O is orders of magnitude slower than just about anything else, if I/O is the bottleneck then the I/O heavy process whould also get a high cpu priority, so that when it needs cpu it gets it so it can go back to doing I/O ASAP.
Certainly one could design any number of synthetic benchmarks were different cpu and I/O priorities would be beneficial, but do these situations really occur in real life?
to post comments)