From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <kpfleming@backtobasicsmgmt.com>
To: linux-lvm@redhat.com
Cc: Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels@cistron.nl>
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Re: IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests
Date: Mon Feb 16 19:32:00 2004 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40316114.30207@backtobasicsmgmt.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040216133047.GA9330@suse.de>
Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 16 2004, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>
>> as you might have seen from the linux-kernel mailinglist
>>I have been testing for months now with a fileserver set up to
>>use XFS over LVM2 on a 3ware RAID5 controller.
>>
I too have been fighting lower-than-expected performance with this
identical combination, other than using a P4 2.8GHz instead of 3.0GHz,
and 1GB RAM instead of 2GB. My 3ware 8506-8 has six Seagate Barracuda
SATA drives behind it, which are very fast on their own :-) Try as I
might, with the 2.6 kernel I have not been able to generate a bonnie++
or iozone run that provided performance better than a single disk, even
with the 3ware card in JBOD, RAID-0 or RAID-1 mode. I had been
conversing with 3ware about it, but to no real effect given than they
don't support 2.6 yet.
>>By fiddling about today I just found that changing
>>/sys/block/sda/queue/nr_requests from 128 to something above
>>the queue depth of the 3ware controller (256 doesn't work,
>>384 and up do) also fixes the problem.
I will try this as well this evening and report my results.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-17 0:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-16 9:11 [linux-lvm] IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-16 8:30 ` [linux-lvm] " Jens Axboe
2004-02-16 9:01 ` Joe Thornber
2004-02-16 19:32 ` Kevin P. Fleming [this message]
2004-02-17 1:46 ` Kevin P. Fleming
2004-02-18 10:29 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-18 23:52 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 8:51 ` [linux-lvm] " Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 1:24 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 8:51 ` [linux-lvm] " Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 1:52 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 9:00 ` [linux-lvm] " Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 2:01 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 9:00 ` [linux-lvm] " Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 1:26 ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-19 8:50 ` [linux-lvm] " Andrew Morton
2004-02-19 2:11 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 9:08 ` [linux-lvm] " Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 2:26 ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-19 9:08 ` [linux-lvm] " Andrew Morton
2004-02-19 10:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 10:23 ` [linux-lvm] " Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 10:19 ` Jens Axboe
2004-02-19 10:26 ` [linux-lvm] " Jens Axboe
2004-02-19 15:58 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 20:59 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 17:52 ` [linux-lvm] " Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 22:52 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 18:52 ` [linux-lvm] " Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 23:53 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 19:15 ` [linux-lvm] " Nick Piggin
2004-02-20 0:15 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 20:16 ` [linux-lvm] [PATCH] per process request limits (was Re: IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests) Nick Piggin
2004-02-20 1:12 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 20:25 ` [linux-lvm] " Andrew Morton
2004-02-20 1:26 ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-19 20:40 ` [linux-lvm] " Nick Piggin
2004-02-20 1:40 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 21:32 ` [linux-lvm] " Andrew Morton
2004-02-20 2:32 ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-20 14:40 ` [PATCH] bdi_congestion_funp (was: Re: [PATCH] per process request limits (was Re: IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests)) Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-23 8:41 ` [linux-lvm] " Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-20 9:56 ` [linux-lvm] " Joe Thornber
2004-02-20 14:59 ` Joe Thornber
2004-02-20 9:59 ` [linux-lvm] " Jens Axboe
2004-02-20 15:00 ` Jens Axboe
2004-02-22 14:02 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-23 8:45 ` [linux-lvm] " Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-22 14:55 ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-22 19:55 ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-20 9:57 ` [linux-lvm] " Jens Axboe
2004-02-20 14:57 ` Jens Axboe
2004-02-24 12:54 ` [linux-lvm] Queue congestion: passing down vs passing up [PATCH] Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 20:52 ` [linux-lvm] Re: [PATCH] per process request limits (was Re: IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests) Nick Piggin
2004-02-20 1:45 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 2:51 ` IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 9:11 ` [linux-lvm] " Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 10:21 ` Jens Axboe
2004-02-19 10:26 ` [linux-lvm] " Jens Axboe
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=40316114.30207@backtobasicsmgmt.com \
--to=kpfleming@backtobasicsmgmt.com \
--cc=linux-lvm@redhat.com \
--cc=miquels@cistron.nl \
/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.