From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: spaminos-ker@yahoo.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: cfq misbehaving on 2.6.11-1.14_FC3
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 13:27:28 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200506241327.31043.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050624023356.63888.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1434 bytes --]
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:33, spaminos-ker@yahoo.com wrote:
> --- Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote:
> > I found the same, and the effect was blunted by noatime and
> > journal_data_writeback (on ext3). Try them one at a time and see what you
> > get.
>
> I had to move to a different box, but get the same kind of results (for
> ext3 default mount options).
>
> Here are the latencies (all cfq) I get with different values for the mount
> parameters
>
> ext2 default
> 0.1s
>
> ext3 default
> 52.6s avg
>
> reiser defaults
> 29s avg 5 minutes
> then,
> 12.9s avg
>
> ext3 rw,noatime,data=writeback
> 0.1s avg
>
> reiser rw,noatime,data=writeback
> 4s avg for 20 seconds
> then 0.1 seconds avg
>
>
> So, indeed adding noatime,data=writeback to the mount options improves
> things a lot.
> I also tried without the noatime, and that doesn't make much difference to
> me.
>
> That looks like a good workaround, I'll now try with the actual server and
> see how things go.
That's more or less what I found, although I found noatime also helped my test
cases, but also less than the journal options. Coincidentally I only
discovered this recently and hadn't gotten around to telling anyone how
dramatic this was and this seemed as good a time as any. I am suspicious that
it wasn't this bad in past kernels but haven't been able to instrument
earlier kernels to check.
Cheers,
Con
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-24 3:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-10 22:54 cfq misbehaving on 2.6.11-1.14_FC3 spaminos-ker
2005-06-11 9:29 ` Andrew Morton
2005-06-14 2:19 ` spaminos-ker
2005-06-14 7:03 ` Andrew Morton
2005-06-14 23:21 ` spaminos-ker
2005-06-17 14:10 ` Jens Axboe
2005-06-17 15:51 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-06-17 18:16 ` Jens Axboe
2005-06-17 23:01 ` spaminos-ker
2005-06-22 9:24 ` Jens Axboe
2005-06-22 17:54 ` spaminos-ker
2005-06-22 20:43 ` Jens Axboe
2005-06-23 18:30 ` spaminos-ker
2005-06-23 23:33 ` Con Kolivas
2005-06-24 2:33 ` spaminos-ker
2005-06-24 3:27 ` Con Kolivas [this message]
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=200506241327.31043.kernel@kolivas.org \
--to=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=spaminos-ker@yahoo.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.