From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m5HCQnrD019247 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:26:49 -0700 Received: from lucidpixels.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 612BF23DC9E for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lucidpixels.com (lucidpixels.com [75.144.35.66]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ydxWzOAcGQTnugUH for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:27:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Justin Piszcz Subject: Re: XFS mkfs/mount options In-Reply-To: <153266.85236.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: References: <153266.85236.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Mark Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com How did you tune your IRQ delivery? Justin. On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Mark wrote: > --- On Tue, 6/17/08, Dave Chinner wrote: > >>> For each of these kernel threads, only those on CPU #2 >> are actually pulling notable load. Why is this? >> >> Because your disk interrupts are delivered to that CPU >> only. > > Thank you! Tuning my IRQ delivery gave a noticeable speed-up. > > -- > Mark > > "What better place to find oneself than > on the streets of one's home village?" > --Capt. Jean-Luc Picard, "Family" > >