Disk scheduling in System V

Authors:
Robert Geist;Robert Reynolds;Eve Pittard
Affiliations:
Department of Computer Science, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina;Department of Computer Science, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina;Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
Venue:
SIGMETRICS '87 Proceedings of the 1987 ACM SIGMETRICS conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems
Year:
1987

Citing 4
Cited 6

A continuum of disk scheduling algorithms

ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS)
Disk scheduling: FCFS vs.SSTF revisited

Communications of the ACM
An anomaly in disk scheduling: a comparison of FCFS and SSTF seek scheduling using an empirical model for disk accesses

Communications of the ACM
A comparative analysis of disk scheduling policies

Communications of the ACM

The design and development of a dynamic program behavior measurement tool for the Intel 8086/88

ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News
Disk arm movement in anticipation of future requests

ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS)
The process-flow model: examining I/O performance from the system's point of view

SIGMETRICS '93 Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGMETRICS conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems
Systems modeling with xpetri

WSC '94 Proceedings of the 26th conference on Winter simulation
Modeling and performance of MEMS-based storage devices

Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGMETRICS international conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems
Disk performance enhancement through Markov-based cylinder remapping

ACM-SE 30 Proceedings of the 30th annual Southeast regional conference

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

A variety of disk scheduling algorithms, including some newly defined ones, are compared both in simulation and in tests on a real machine running UNIX* System V. In the real system tests, first-come first-served (FCFS), shortest seek time first (SSTF), and the standard System V algorithm (SVS) are all seen to yield relatively poor mean waiting time performance when compared to the VSCAN(0.2) algorithm and modifications thereof suggested by Coffman. Nevertheless, each is seen to excel along a particular performance dimension. The adequacy of open, Poisson arrival simulation models in predicting disk scheduling performance is questioned, and an alternative arrival model is suggested which offers improved predictions in the System V environment.