© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
73416ba
(Get the code!)
Vasil,
I have tried testing every scheduler available. I have copied a 700 MB file between tests to flush the cache.
The results are as follows:
- Noop is the slowest scheduler, by maybe 5-10%, no more.
- All of the other schedulers seem to have the same performance.
- If I don't flush the cache, Evolution is *REALLY* fast (at least 5 times faster, maybe 10) with every scheduler.
- Just for information, copying the 700 MB file from and to the same disk takes approx 36 seconds with every scheduler but "noop", and 40 with "noop".
So the bottom line, at least on my system (Dell Precision M65 laptop, 1 GB RAM, 7200rpm sata hdd, 32 bit Core Duo T2500, seems to be that basically all schedulers show equal performance.
I have not tried to see how responsive is the system while running the tests, so my test does not focus on multitasking or desktop responsiveness, only on the timing of a single operation that basically can use all of the CPU time and disk I/O bandwiidth (copying a single file or opening Evolution).