From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: rwhron@earthlink.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: big ext3 sequential write improvement in 2.5.51-mm1 gone in 2.5.53-mm1?
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:10:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030123181042.025fcbbf.akpm@digeo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030124012618.GA12005@rushmore>
rwhron@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> Did you add a secret sauce to 2.5.59-mm2?
I have not been paying any attention to the I/O scheduler changes for a
couple of months, so I can't say exactly what caused this. Possibly Nick's
batch expiry logic which causes the scheduler to alternate between reading
and writing with fairly coarse granularity.
> 10x sequential write improvement on ext3 for multiple tiobench threads.
OK...
I _have_ been paying attention to the IO scheduler for the past few days.
-mm5 will have the first draft of the anticipatory IO scheduler. This of
course is yielding tremendous improvements in bandwidth when there are
competing reads and writes.
I expect it will take another week or two to get the I/O scheduler changes
really settled down. Your assistance in thoroughly benching that would be
appreciated.
> 2.4.20aa1 8.24 7.21% 28.587 449134.11 0.10395 0.07086 114
> 2.5.59 9.50 5.50% 36.703 4310.62 0.00000 0.00000 173
> 2.5.59-mm2 35.28 17.69% 10.173 18950.56 0.01010 0.00000 199
boggle.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-24 2:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-24 1:26 big ext3 sequential write improvement in 2.5.51-mm1 gone in 2.5.53-mm1? rwhron
2003-01-24 2:10 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2003-01-24 2:33 ` Nick Piggin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-24 21:19 rwhron
2003-01-24 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2003-01-16 1:50 rwhron
2003-01-16 6:31 ` Andrew Morton
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=20030123181042.025fcbbf.akpm@digeo.com \
--to=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=rwhron@earthlink.net \
/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.