Fedora Switching To The BFQ I/O Scheduler For Better Responsiveness & Throughput

[M@yeulC]

Latest BFQ seems to work well with NVME if I read this correctly: https://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/BFQ/results.php

and his email to Ubuntu

That's my experience as well, BFQ seems to work well with nvme. I'm currently testing out kyber, though, and didn't have any issues with it so far.

[Vistaus]

What is so great about BFQ vs Kyber? I've been using Kyber for a long time on this laptop and to me it feels better.

[Space Heater]

I have proposed to leave NVMe out for the moment, as a precaution. The idea is to add also NVMe if everything goes well with this preliminary step.

Thank you for your work on bfq Paolo, your IO scheduler has made a big improvement to the responsiveness of my systems when under load. Your patience getting bfq upstreamed (how many years and how many changing demands did they make?) was simply incredible. Now I see that your time spent convincing the big distributions is also paying off, congratulations.

[THIRSTY GNOMES]

Curious if this is only referring to Fedora Desktop or all across the board (Fedora Server, Atomic/CoreOS, etc).

[xorbe]

Canonical will make their own scheduler, claim it's better, not support any other scheduler. Then in 5 years time when they can't maintain it anymore, will switch to BFQ.

openSUSE will declare BFQ as insecure, and disable it from being selected, after a 12 hour call for comments on an obscure mailing list.

[cobratbq]

openSUSE will declare BFQ as insecure, and disable it from being selected, after a 12 hour call for comments on an obscure mailing list.

Interesting .. do you have any additional information as to why this is? Or a reference?

I'm trying out BFQ as of the last couple of days. I got curious because of the recent news. So far it's been working miracles for my desktop and notebooks. Up to now I am really happy with it.

[blackshard]

Interesting .. do you have any additional information as to why this is? Or a reference?

I guess that was sarcasm

[ThoreauHD]

Canonical will make their own scheduler, claim it's better, not support any other scheduler. Then in 5 years time when they can't maintain it anymore, will switch to BFQ.

You saucy bastard.

[hax0r]

Now we need MuQSS as a default CPU scheduler in desktop distros, preferably after Valve takes a good look at it, CFS is for server loads, even Huawei went away with CFS and reported boost in UI responsivity and latency.

[cobratbq]

I guess that was sarcasm

Oh god .. obviously, I didn't catch the Canonical joke ... /me feeling stupid.