All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
To: "Marinos J. Yannikos" <mjy@geizhals.at>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: gdth / SCSI read performance issues (2.2.19 and 2.4.10)
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:28:32 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3BD73280.7FC6526D@zip.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3BD6B278.3070300@geizhals.at> <3BD6ECE6.8C9435C4@zip.com.au> <3BD729B6.6030902@geizhals.at>

"Marinos J. Yannikos" wrote:
> 
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> > Well that's pretty bad, isn't it?
> 
> We could have bought a much cheaper controller and slower disks ;-)

It's Linux's way of saving you money :)

> > - Disable CONFIG_HIGHMEM
> 
> That seems to have no effect on performance. Btw., the 64GB support in
> 2.4.10 seemed to be buggy ("0-order allocation failed", then the DB
> crashed), so we were using the 4GB setting.

There have been many reports of this happening, but they
are tapering off now.

> > - Try linux-2.4.13
> 
> This helped - now performance is up to par with 2.2.19 (~ 85MB/s) - thanks!

It's surprising that 2.4.10->2.4.13 actually doubled throughput.
 
> > - Profile the kernel. [...]  With something like:
> >       ~/kern-prof.sh cp some_huge_file /dev/null
> 
> I tried this, but with
>   dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/null bs=1024k count=3000
> 
> (the fs is too slow - so "cp" peaks out at 17MB/s!)

Really?  Are you saying that on a controller which can
do 85 megs/second, you can't read files through the filesystem
at greater than 17?  Which filesystem?

> The result (last 4 lines):
> c01388fc try_to_free_buffers                          55   0.1511
> c0128b10 file_read_actor                            1179  14.0357
> c01053b0 default_idle                               6784 130.4615
> 00000000 total                                      8695   0.0065

OK, that's normal and proper.  Almost all the kernel time
is spent copying data.
 
> Does this suggest that the kernel isn't the bottleneck?

Well...   We seem to have three issues here:

1: Why isn't the controller achieving the manufacturer's
   claimed throughput?

   Don't know.  Maybe it's the software copy.  Maybe it's the
   device driver.  Maybe they lied :).  It'd be interesting
   to test it on the same machine with the vendor's drivers
   and win2k.

2: 0-order allocation failures.

3: Poor `cp' throughput.  This one is strange.  Perhaps
   `cp' is using a small transfer-size and the kernel's
   readhead isn't working properly.  Could you experiment
   with this some more?  For example, what happens with

	dd if=large_file of=/dev/null bs=4096k

-

  reply	other threads:[~2001-10-24 21:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-10-24 12:22 gdth / SCSI read performance issues (2.2.19 and 2.4.10) Marinos Yannikos
2001-10-24 16:31 ` Andrew Morton
2001-10-24 20:51   ` Marinos J. Yannikos
2001-10-24 21:28     ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2001-10-24 22:55       ` Marinos J. Yannikos

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=3BD73280.7FC6526D@zip.com.au \
    --to=akpm@zip.com.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjy@geizhals.at \
    /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.