Unfortunately, the ideal scheduler really depends on storage configuration.
Gluster, ZFS, iSCSI, FC, and NFS don't align on a single "best" configuration
(to say nothing of direct LUNs on guests), then there's workload considerations.
>
> The scale team is aiming for a balanced "default" policy rather than one
> which is best for a specific environment.
>
> That said, I'm optimistic that the results will let us give better
> recommendations if your workload/storage benefits from a different scheduler
I completely disagree !
If you use anything other than noop/none (depending if multiqueue is on), your
scheduler inside the VM will reorder and delay your I/O.
Then the I/O will be received by the Host and this repeats again.
I can point to SuSe and Red Hat knowledge base where both vendors highly
recommend noop/none as schedulers for VM.
It has nothing in common with the backend - that's in control of the hosts I/O
scheduler.
Can some one tell me under which section should I open a bug ? Bugzilla is not
newbie-friendly and I should admit that opening bugs for RHEL/CentOS is far
easier.
The best bug section might be ovirt appliance - related , as this is only
valid for VMs and not bare-metal Engine.
Best Regards,
Strahil Nikolov
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/
oVirt Code of Conduct:
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives:
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/SNSSDE33P2YWVJM5ADQAGEF465SDPM2Q/
