I am interested in this too, from the docs really it looks like the prioritization is mostly handled by queuing on the CPU. Is the overhead associated with managing the priorities worth paying if you have some volumes with very latency sensitive IO?


Jeremy Page|Senior Technical Architect|Gilbarco Veeder-Root, A Danaher Company
Office:336-547-5399|Cell:336-601-7274|24x7 Emergency:336-430-8151

On 02/08/2012 07:20 AM, Jack Lyons wrote: 
Has anyone used FlexShare and had extremely positive results.  IT seems 
that the improvement would be minor and misconfiguration could lead to 
no improvement for intended volumes and degradation for others.  From 
reading, it seems that you need to assign priorities to each volume 
otherwise the volumes in the default queue will experience degradation.

Would anyone like to share details of how the implemented flexshare and 
the impact it had on the performance issue they were working to resolve?

Would also like to know if anyone has try to 'schedule flexshare' 
settings using rsh or api e.g. we want to give higher priorities to 
certain volumes from 6pm to 11pm nightly.

Thanks
Jack
_______________________________________________
Toasters mailing list
Toasters@teaparty.net
http://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters

Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us by email by replying to the sender and delete this message. The sender disclaims that the content of this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, any agreement; provided that the foregoing does not invalidate the binding effect of any digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is included in any attachment.