Linux 5.0 HDD I/O Scheduler Benchmarks - BFQ Takes The Cake

Written by Michael Larabel in Computers on 5 March 2019. Page 2 of 3. 24 Comments

While measuring the time to launch xterm with sequential reads happening in the background, BFQ did very well similar to the SSD results. BFQ in its low-latency mode yields a much more responsive system compared to the other scheduler options, but even this Budget Fair Queuing scheduler in its non-low-latency mode did still perform well and better than the other I/O schedulers benchmarked on these two consumer HDDs.

While launching xterm again with both reads and writes happening in the background, BFQ still did an exceptional job providing a responsive Linux desktop.

With the basic SQLite embedded database library benchmark, there wasn't much variation between the I/O schedulers with the WD VelociRaptor but none and BFQ low-latency tended to do the best on the WD "Green" drive while Kyber and Mq-deadline were slower albeit with some wild swings in variation between runs.

Random writes yielded similar performance on the VelociRaptor HDD between Mq-deadline, Kyber, and BFQ while BFQ's low-latency and using no I/O scheduler led to lower random write speeds.

For sequential writes, BFQ in its throughput mode was performing very well albeit with a fair amount of noise to these particular results.

Related Articles