From: Jason Holmes <jholmes@psu.edu>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: IO degradation in 2.4.17-pre2 vs. 2.4.16
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:16:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C092CAB.4D1541F4@psu.edu> (raw)
I saw in a previous thread that the interactivity improvements in
2.4.17-pre2 had some adverse effect on IO throughput and since I was
already evaluating 2.4.16 for a somewhat large fileserving project, I
threw 2.4.17-pre2 on to see what has changed. Throughput while serving
a large number of clients is important to me, so my tests have included
using dbench to try to see how things scale as clients increase.
2.4.16:
Throughput 116.098 MB/sec (NB=145.123 MB/sec 1160.98 MBit/sec) 1 procs
Throughput 206.604 MB/sec (NB=258.255 MB/sec 2066.04 MBit/sec) 2 procs
Throughput 210.364 MB/sec (NB=262.955 MB/sec 2103.64 MBit/sec) 4 procs
Throughput 213.397 MB/sec (NB=266.747 MB/sec 2133.97 MBit/sec) 8 procs
Throughput 210.989 MB/sec (NB=263.736 MB/sec 2109.89 MBit/sec) 16
procs
Throughput 138.713 MB/sec (NB=173.391 MB/sec 1387.13 MBit/sec) 32
procs
Throughput 117.729 MB/sec (NB=147.162 MB/sec 1177.29 MBit/sec) 64
procs
Throughput 66.7354 MB/sec (NB=83.4193 MB/sec 667.354 MBit/sec) 128
procs
2.4.17-pre2:
Throughput 96.2302 MB/sec (NB=120.288 MB/sec 962.302 MBit/sec) 1 procs
Throughput 226.679 MB/sec (NB=283.349 MB/sec 2266.79 MBit/sec) 2 procs
Throughput 223.955 MB/sec (NB=279.944 MB/sec 2239.55 MBit/sec) 4 procs
Throughput 224.533 MB/sec (NB=280.666 MB/sec 2245.33 MBit/sec) 8 procs
Throughput 153.672 MB/sec (NB=192.09 MB/sec 1536.72 MBit/sec) 16 procs
Throughput 91.3464 MB/sec (NB=114.183 MB/sec 913.464 MBit/sec) 32
procs
Throughput 64.876 MB/sec (NB=81.095 MB/sec 648.76 MBit/sec) 64 procs
Throughput 54.9774 MB/sec (NB=68.7217 MB/sec 549.774 MBit/sec) 128
procs
Throughput 136.522 MB/sec (NB=170.652 MB/sec 1365.22 MBit/sec) 1 procs
Throughput 223.682 MB/sec (NB=279.603 MB/sec 2236.82 MBit/sec) 2 procs
Throughput 222.806 MB/sec (NB=278.507 MB/sec 2228.06 MBit/sec) 4 procs
Throughput 224.427 MB/sec (NB=280.534 MB/sec 2244.27 MBit/sec) 8 procs
Throughput 152.286 MB/sec (NB=190.358 MB/sec 1522.86 MBit/sec) 16
procs
Throughput 92.044 MB/sec (NB=115.055 MB/sec 920.44 MBit/sec) 32 procs
Throughput 78.0881 MB/sec (NB=97.6101 MB/sec 780.881 MBit/sec) 64
procs
Throughput 66.1573 MB/sec (NB=82.6966 MB/sec 661.573 MBit/sec) 128
procs
Throughput 117.95 MB/sec (NB=147.438 MB/sec 1179.5 MBit/sec) 1 procs
Throughput 212.469 MB/sec (NB=265.586 MB/sec 2124.69 MBit/sec) 2 procs
Throughput 214.763 MB/sec (NB=268.453 MB/sec 2147.63 MBit/sec) 4 procs
Throughput 214.007 MB/sec (NB=267.509 MB/sec 2140.07 MBit/sec) 8 procs
Throughput 96.6572 MB/sec (NB=120.821 MB/sec 966.572 MBit/sec) 16
procs
Throughput 48.1342 MB/sec (NB=60.1677 MB/sec 481.342 MBit/sec) 32
procs
Throughput 71.3444 MB/sec (NB=89.1806 MB/sec 713.444 MBit/sec) 64
procs
Throughput 59.258 MB/sec (NB=74.0724 MB/sec 592.58 MBit/sec) 128 procs
I have included three runs for 2.4.17-pre2 to show how inconsistent its
results are; 2.4.16 didn't have this problem to this extent. bonnie++
numbers seem largely unchanged between kernels, coming in around:
------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
2512M 14348 81 49495 26 24438 16 16040 96 55006 15 373.7 1
------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
16 3087 99 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 3175 100 +++++ +++ 11042 100
The test machine is an IBM 342 with 2 1.26 GHz P3 processors and 1.25 GB
of RAM. The above numbers were generated off of 1 10K RPM SCSI disk
hanging off of an Adaptec aix7899 controller.
--
Jason Holmes
next reply other threads:[~2001-12-01 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-01 19:16 Jason Holmes [this message]
2001-12-01 21:34 ` IO degradation in 2.4.17-pre2 vs. 2.4.16 Andrew Morton
2001-12-01 22:35 ` Jason Holmes
2001-12-03 19:22 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-12-03 23:32 ` Jason Holmes
2001-12-11 22:37 ` Bill Davidsen
[not found] <fa.n0jjs6v.7ms98a@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.jlqjvuv.348ign@ifi.uio.no>
2001-12-11 22:37 ` Dan Maas
2001-12-11 21:44 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-12-11 23:14 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-12 0:23 ` Andrew Morton
2001-12-12 0:52 ` J Sloan
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=3C092CAB.4D1541F4@psu.edu \
--to=jholmes@psu.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.