From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
Cc: jeff.liu@oracle.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: improve test 286 for repeated unwritten/hole extents.
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 18:36:16 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120704083616.GI19223@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FF30A89.9010800@sgi.com>
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 10:06:49AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 07/03/12 02:30, Jeff Liu wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >I'd like to enlarge the test coverage of 286 to includes file mapping with repeated hole/unwritten/unwritten_without_data/data intersections.
> >
> >Those two new sub-tests could help verifying the current seek_data/seek_hole improvements.
> >
> >Besides, I observed a weird thing at the diff of 286.full, look at the the sparse file creation output, there seems to be a significant
> >I/O degradation compare to the old test01/test02 IOPS results:
> >
> >-1 MiB, 256 ops; 0.0000 sec (1.242 GiB/sec and 325699.7455 ops/sec)
> >+1 MiB, 256 ops; 0.0000 sec (70.161 MiB/sec and 17961.1310 ops/sec)
> >
> >I run the test on same machine and same partition, I recalled the old result is generated against around 3.4-rc2(not very sure), now is updated
> >to 3.5-rc4, does anyone hit that?
> >
> >
>
> Quick feedback. I don't see any degradation.
>
> OLD: 1 MiB, 256 ops; 0.0000 sec (484.027 MiB/sec and 123910.9390 ops/sec)
> THIS: 1 MiB, 256 ops; 0.0000 sec (494.560 MiB/sec and 126607.3195 ops/sec)
>
> All the tests are very close to the unpatched results.
Sounds like the change in size pushed the workload from running in
memory under the dirty limit to being over the dirty limit and
running at disk speed rather than page cache speed. i.e. the
behaviour is RAM size dependent....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-04 8:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-03 7:30 [PATCH] xfstests: improve test 286 for repeated unwritten/hole extents Jeff Liu
2012-07-03 15:06 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-07-03 15:39 ` Jeff Liu
2012-07-04 8:36 ` Dave Chinner [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=20120704083616.GI19223@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jeff.liu@oracle.com \
--cc=tinguely@sgi.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox