From: "Mike Black" <mblack@csihq.com>
To: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
"Ben LaHaise" <bcrl@redhat.com>
Cc: "Daniel Phillips" <phillips@bonn-fries.net>,
"Rik van Riel" <riel@conectiva.com.br>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <andrewm@uow.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC][DATA] re "ongoing vm suckage"
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:22:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <028001c11cf0$e5becca0$b6562341@cfl.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108032330450.1193-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>
I'm testing 2.4.8-pre4 -- MUCH better interactivity behavior now.
I've been testing ext3/raid5 for several weeks now and this is usable now.
My system is Dual 1Ghz/2GRam/4GSwap fibrechannel.
But...the single thread i/o performance is down.
Previously I was getting about 60MB/sec on one thread for Seq Read -- now
it's 40MB/sec.
Here's the run:
tiobench.pl --size 4000
Size is MB, BlkSz is Bytes, Read, Write, and Seeks are MB/secd . -T
File Block Num Seq Read Rand Read Seq Write Rand Write
Dir Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%)
------- ------ ------- --- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
. 4000 4096 1 40.62 73.8% 0.675 1.38% 27.08 43.6% 1.207 2.00%
. 4000 4096 2 17.02 30.2% 0.761 1.63% 16.84 29.9% 1.270 1.78%
. 4000 4096 4 14.96 26.8% 0.885 2.13% 13.75 31.2% 1.278 1.69%
. 4000 4096 8 13.39 21.5% 0.952 2.48% 12.46 33.2% 1.188 1.48%
During the 4-thread run there was one long pause (instead of being totally
unusable before with even 2 threads).
Didn't notice any pauses during 8 threads.
I"m seeing a lot more CPU Usage for the 1st thread than previous tests --
perhaps we've shortened the queue too much and it's throttling the read?
Why would CPU usage go up and I/O go down?
Here's a previous test (only 1 thread as 2 threads became unusable).
File Block Num Seq Read Rand Read Seq Write Rand Write
Dir Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%)
------- ------ ------- --- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
. 4000 4096 1 66.69 53.6% 0.829 1.43% 27.64 41.6% 1.287 0.74%
----- Original Message -----
From: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@transmeta.com>
To: "Ben LaHaise" <bcrl@redhat.com>
Cc: "Daniel Phillips" <phillips@bonn-fries.net>; "Rik van Riel"
<riel@conectiva.com.br>; <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>;
<linux-mm@kvack.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 2:37 AM
Subject: Re: [RFC][DATA] re "ongoing vm suckage"
>
> Well, I've made a 2.4.8-pre4.
>
> This one has marcelo's zone fixes, and my request suggestions. I'm writing
> email right now with the 8GB write in the background, and unpacked and
> patched a kernel. It's certainly not _fast_, but it's not too painful to
> use either. The 8GB file took 7:25 to write (including the sync), which
> averages out to 18+MB/s. Which is, as far as I can tell, about the best I
> can get on this 5400RPM 80GB drive with the current IDE driver (the
> experimental IDE driver is supposed to do better, but that's not for
> 2.4.x)
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Mike Black" <mblack@csihq.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>, Ben LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>,
Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Andrew Morton <andrewm@uow.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC][DATA] re "ongoing vm suckage"
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:22:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <028001c11cf0$e5becca0$b6562341@cfl.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.LNX.4.33.0108032330450.1193-100000@penguin.transmeta.com
I'm testing 2.4.8-pre4 -- MUCH better interactivity behavior now.
I've been testing ext3/raid5 for several weeks now and this is usable now.
My system is Dual 1Ghz/2GRam/4GSwap fibrechannel.
But...the single thread i/o performance is down.
Previously I was getting about 60MB/sec on one thread for Seq Read -- now
it's 40MB/sec.
Here's the run:
tiobench.pl --size 4000
Size is MB, BlkSz is Bytes, Read, Write, and Seeks are MB/secd . -T
File Block Num Seq Read Rand Read Seq Write Rand Write
Dir Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%)
------- ------ ------- --- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
. 4000 4096 1 40.62 73.8% 0.675 1.38% 27.08 43.6% 1.207 2.00%
. 4000 4096 2 17.02 30.2% 0.761 1.63% 16.84 29.9% 1.270 1.78%
. 4000 4096 4 14.96 26.8% 0.885 2.13% 13.75 31.2% 1.278 1.69%
. 4000 4096 8 13.39 21.5% 0.952 2.48% 12.46 33.2% 1.188 1.48%
During the 4-thread run there was one long pause (instead of being totally
unusable before with even 2 threads).
Didn't notice any pauses during 8 threads.
I"m seeing a lot more CPU Usage for the 1st thread than previous tests --
perhaps we've shortened the queue too much and it's throttling the read?
Why would CPU usage go up and I/O go down?
Here's a previous test (only 1 thread as 2 threads became unusable).
File Block Num Seq Read Rand Read Seq Write Rand Write
Dir Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%)
------- ------ ------- --- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
. 4000 4096 1 66.69 53.6% 0.829 1.43% 27.64 41.6% 1.287 0.74%
----- Original Message -----
From: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@transmeta.com>
To: "Ben LaHaise" <bcrl@redhat.com>
Cc: "Daniel Phillips" <phillips@bonn-fries.net>; "Rik van Riel"
<riel@conectiva.com.br>; <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>;
<linux-mm@kvack.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 2:37 AM
Subject: Re: [RFC][DATA] re "ongoing vm suckage"
>
> Well, I've made a 2.4.8-pre4.
>
> This one has marcelo's zone fixes, and my request suggestions. I'm writing
> email right now with the 8GB write in the background, and unpacked and
> patched a kernel. It's certainly not _fast_, but it's not too painful to
> use either. The 8GB file took 7:25 to write (including the sync), which
> averages out to 18+MB/s. Which is, as far as I can tell, about the best I
> can get on this 5400RPM 80GB drive with the current IDE driver (the
> experimental IDE driver is supposed to do better, but that's not for
> 2.4.x)
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-08-04 14:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 94+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-08-03 23:44 [RFC][DATA] re "ongoing vm suckage" Ben LaHaise
2001-08-03 23:44 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 1:29 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-04 1:29 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-04 3:06 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-04 3:06 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-04 3:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 3:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 3:23 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-04 3:23 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-04 3:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 3:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 3:26 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 3:26 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 3:34 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-04 3:34 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-04 3:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 3:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 3:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 3:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 4:14 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 4:14 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 4:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 4:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 4:39 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 4:39 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 4:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 4:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 5:13 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 5:13 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-04 5:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 5:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 6:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 6:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 5:38 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-08-04 5:38 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-08-04 7:13 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-04 7:13 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-04 23:28 ` [PATCH] Unlazy activate (was: re "ongoing vm suckage") Daniel Phillips
2001-08-04 14:22 ` Mike Black [this message]
2001-08-04 14:22 ` [RFC][DATA] re "ongoing vm suckage" Mike Black
2001-08-04 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 20:54 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-08-05 4:19 ` Michael Rothwell
2001-08-05 4:19 ` Michael Rothwell
2001-08-05 18:40 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-08-05 18:40 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-08-05 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-05 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-05 20:45 ` arjan
2001-08-06 20:32 ` Rob Landley
2001-08-06 20:32 ` Rob Landley
2001-08-05 15:24 ` Mike Black
2001-08-05 15:24 ` Mike Black
2001-08-05 20:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-05 20:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-05 20:23 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-05 20:23 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-05 20:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-05 20:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-04 16:21 ` Mark Hemment
2001-08-04 16:21 ` Mark Hemment
2001-08-07 15:45 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-07 15:45 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-07 16:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 16:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 16:51 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-07 16:51 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-07 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 18:17 ` Andrew Morton
2001-08-07 18:17 ` Andrew Morton
2001-08-07 18:40 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-07 18:40 ` Ben LaHaise
2001-08-07 21:33 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-07 21:33 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-07 22:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 21:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 21:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 17:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 17:11 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-07 19:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 19:21 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-07 20:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 23:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 17:26 ` Chris Mason
2001-08-07 18:13 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-07 18:40 ` Chris Mason
2001-08-07 19:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-07 20:22 ` Chris Mason
2001-08-08 1:08 ` Theodore Tso
2001-08-08 1:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-08-08 2:25 ` Marcelo Tosatti
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='028001c11cf0$e5becca0$b6562341@cfl.rr.com' \
--to=mblack@csihq.com \
--cc=andrewm@uow.edu.au \
--cc=bcrl@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=phillips@bonn-fries.net \
--cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.