From: Dave Olien <dmo@osdl.org>
To: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: rwhron@earthlink.net, venom@sns.it, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@osdl.org, Mary Edie Meredith <maryedie@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] I/O regression after 2.6.0-test5
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 12:08:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031022190808.GA10311@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031022183028.GA10249@osdl.org>
I don't know how useful this might but. I've been trying to
track down which patches to as-iosched resulted in the performance
drop. The results so far are a little confusing. I have been
running reaim on an 8-way system, comparing as-iosched performance
with deadline, on each kernel version. The numbers are "number
of jobs per minute". So, larger is better.
Deadline As-iosched
2.6.0-test5 8542 8589
2.6.0-test5-mm1 8303 8401
2.6.0-test5-mm2 8309 8224
2.6.0-test5-mm3 8222 8417
2.6.0-test6 8302 6934 ****
2.6.0-test6-mm1 8375 8163
2.6.0-test6-mm2 ??? 8309
I'm still getting data on test6-mm*. It's curious that
performance dropped for test6, but came back for test6-mm1.
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 11:30:28AM -0700, Dave Olien wrote:
>
> Sorry, this patch didn't fix our performance problems. Mary just
> finished running dbt2 on test8 with your patch:
>
> NOTPM kernel scheduler
> 965 2.6.0-test8-np AS
> 1632 2.6.-test6-mm4 deadline
>
> This is an 8-way system with DAC960 and 12 LUNs, using raw devices.
> That's still quite a sizeable drop.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-22 19:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-21 13:05 [BENCHMARK] I/O regression after 2.6.0-test5 rwhron
2003-10-21 15:57 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-21 21:07 ` venom
2003-10-22 9:54 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-22 18:30 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-22 19:08 ` Dave Olien [this message]
2003-10-23 2:24 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-23 3:48 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-23 20:35 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-23 23:07 ` Nick Piggin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-10-29 0:38 rwhron
2003-10-27 23:33 John Hawkes
2003-10-26 10:38 rwhron
2003-10-27 23:49 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-24 23:43 rwhron
2003-10-24 12:46 rwhron
2003-10-24 0:10 rwhron
2003-10-20 0:37 rwhron
2003-10-20 1:35 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-20 4:52 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-20 8:12 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-20 4:51 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-20 7:55 ` venom
2003-10-21 4:49 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-24 13:52 ` Magnus Andersson
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=20031022190808.GA10311@osdl.org \
--to=dmo@osdl.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maryedie@osdl.org \
--cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
--cc=rwhron@earthlink.net \
--cc=venom@sns.it \
/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.