From: rwhron@earthlink.net
To: reiserfs-list@namesys.com
Subject: big reiserfs regression in 2.4.20-pre2
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 23:08:28 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020816030828.GC10387@rushmore> (raw)
On a quad xeon with 3.75 gb ram there was a big
regression in dbench and tiobench with many threads
between 2.4.20-pre1 and 2.4.20-pre2. Below is from
5 dbench runs.
There was a 23% regression at 192 processes
reiserfs
dbench 192 processes Average High Low
2.4.20-pre1 55.94 58.17 54.26
2.4.20-pre2 42.98 44.73 42.30
And 13% regression at 64 processes.
dbench 64 processes Average High Low
2.4.20-pre1 70.98 72.53 69.47
2.4.20-pre2 61.93 64.01 57.31
ext2 and ext3 did not change between 2.4.20-pre1 and pre2.
ext3
dbench 192 processes Average High Low
2.4.20-pre1 60.50 61.47 59.01
2.4.20-pre2 60.61 61.63 58.80
dbench 64 processes Average High Low
2.4.20-pre1 82.73 89.63 64.67
2.4.20-pre2 83.12 91.28 65.11
ext2
dbench 192 processes Average High Low
2.4.20-pre1 116.32 124.44 110.95
2.4.20-pre2 116.45 119.89 109.89
dbench 64 processes Average High Low
2.4.20-pre1 145.61 158.67 102.33
2.4.20-pre2 145.77 158.96 103.89
CPU utilization on reiserfs went down in the high thread count
tiobench tests, but it also had a throughput regression when there was
more than one thread most tests. ext2 and ext3 didn't have a regression.
tiobench-0.3.3
Unit information
================
File size = 12288 megabytes
Blk Size = 4096 bytes
Rate = megabytes per second
CPU% = percentage of CPU used during the test
Latency = milliseconds
Lat% = percent of requests that took longer than X seconds
CPU Eff = Rate divided by CPU% - throughput per cpu load
Sequential Reads reiserfs had the biggest drop in throughput.
Num Avg Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Kernel Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency Latency >2s >10s Eff
------------- --- ----------------------------------------------------------
2.4.20-pre1 1 35.11 23.02% 0.331 107.07 0.00000 0.00000 152
2.4.20-pre2 1 34.68 22.83% 0.335 119.57 0.00000 0.00000 152
2.4.20-pre1 32 27.27 20.12% 11.536 258436.68 0.01275 0.01135 136
2.4.20-pre2 32 8.00 6.05% 43.881 7568.44 0.00096 0.00000 132
2.4.20-pre1 64 26.50 19.63% 21.328 361756.08 0.02183 0.02053 135
2.4.20-pre2 64 8.42 6.46% 79.039 15721.84 0.18813 0.00000 130
2.4.20-pre1 128 27.72 21.17% 35.485 814716.92 0.02671 0.02549 131
2.4.20-pre2 128 9.30 7.10% 135.056 32520.09 3.92532 0.00035 131
2.4.20-pre1 256 26.55 19.95% 68.425 825224.03 0.04636 0.04515 133
2.4.20-pre2 256 8.47 6.49% 285.430 62013.50 4.68931 0.11676 131
Random Reads reiserfs went down when there is more than 1 thread.
Num Avg Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Kernel Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency Latency >2s >10s Eff
------------- --- ----------------------------------------------------------
2.4.20-pre1 1 0.68 0.84% 17.320 51.54 0.00000 0.00000 81
2.4.20-pre2 1 0.70 0.76% 16.787 53.99 0.00000 0.00000 92
2.4.20-pre1 32 3.09 6.80% 102.783 535.46 0.00000 0.00000 46
2.4.20-pre2 32 1.98 3.84% 147.780 16015.44 0.55000 0.00000 52
2.4.20-pre1 64 3.10 5.99% 178.641 10722.38 0.50403 0.00000 52
2.4.20-pre2 64 2.18 3.70% 229.511 16850.53 2.77218 0.00000 59
2.4.20-pre1 128 3.35 5.27% 226.876 9018.16 1.91532 0.00000 64
2.4.20-pre2 128 2.31 3.98% 378.511 17932.69 5.77117 0.00000 58
2.4.20-pre1 256 3.26 6.44% 249.264 5751.33 0.57292 0.00000 51
2.4.20-pre2 256 2.20 5.53% 724.340 19268.40 13.09896 0.00000 40
Sequential Writes reiserfs cpu utilization went down, but throughput dropped.
Num Avg Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Kernel Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency Latency >2s >10s Eff
------------- --- ----------------------------------------------------------
2.4.20-pre1 1 39.31 71.71% 0.282 6301.59 0.00012 0.00000 55
2.4.20-pre2 1 38.28 73.39% 0.290 8058.03 0.00019 0.00000 52
2.4.20-pre1 32 29.64 119.5% 11.171 16619.06 0.18094 0.00000 25
2.4.20-pre2 32 23.52 103.0% 10.242 17721.55 0.13629 0.00000 23
2.4.20-pre1 64 29.02 115.6% 22.065 38792.62 0.38675 0.00426 25
2.4.20-pre2 64 20.92 84.06% 19.449 41273.31 0.33824 0.00480 25
2.4.20-pre1 128 31.52 111.6% 36.264 104743.20 0.40728 0.11428 28
2.4.20-pre2 128 22.31 87.18% 36.251 78916.66 0.46791 0.10154 26
2.4.20-pre1 256 28.95 132.7% 75.959 163159.61 0.79301 0.24067 22
2.4.20-pre2 256 20.08 93.50% 74.113 114883.50 0.83399 0.23864 21
Random Writes reiserfs - slightly improved.
Num Avg Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Kernel Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency Latency >2s >10s Eff
------------- --- ----------------------------------------------------------
2.4.20-pre1 1 3.57 3.80% 0.091 0.57 0.00000 0.00000 94
2.4.20-pre2 1 3.63 3.79% 0.089 0.68 0.00000 0.00000 96
2.4.20-pre1 32 3.52 9.15% 0.654 268.43 0.00000 0.00000 38
2.4.20-pre2 32 3.57 8.15% 0.377 258.42 0.00000 0.00000 44
2.4.20-pre1 64 3.68 9.50% 0.567 196.77 0.00000 0.00000 39
2.4.20-pre2 64 3.78 9.76% 0.450 319.24 0.00000 0.00000 39
2.4.20-pre1 128 3.48 8.38% 2.923 626.60 0.00000 0.00000 42
2.4.20-pre2 128 3.54 8.98% 0.669 735.87 0.00000 0.00000 39
2.4.20-pre1 256 3.45 9.11% 3.416 572.87 0.00000 0.00000 38
2.4.20-pre2 256 3.59 10.12% 1.350 824.15 0.00000 0.00000 35
Bonnie++ did not have these regressions, but I run that as a single thread.
More on the tests at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~rwhron/kernel/bigbox.html
--
Randy Hron
next reply other threads:[~2002-08-16 3:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-08-16 3:08 rwhron [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-08-17 10:05 big reiserfs regression in 2.4.20-pre2 rwhron
2002-08-19 5:17 ` Oleg Drokin
2002-08-20 23:31 ` Oleg Drokin
2002-08-21 3:26 rwhron
2002-08-21 4:50 ` Oleg Drokin
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=20020816030828.GC10387@rushmore \
--to=rwhron@earthlink.net \
--cc=reiserfs-list@namesys.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.