From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: rwhron@earthlink.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: big ext3 sequential write improvement in 2.5.51-mm1 gone in 2.5.53-mm1?
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:10:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030123181042.025fcbbf.akpm@digeo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030124012618.GA12005@rushmore>
rwhron@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> Did you add a secret sauce to 2.5.59-mm2?
I have not been paying any attention to the I/O scheduler changes for a
couple of months, so I can't say exactly what caused this. Possibly Nick's
batch expiry logic which causes the scheduler to alternate between reading
and writing with fairly coarse granularity.
> 10x sequential write improvement on ext3 for multiple tiobench threads.
OK...
I _have_ been paying attention to the IO scheduler for the past few days.
-mm5 will have the first draft of the anticipatory IO scheduler. This of
course is yielding tremendous improvements in bandwidth when there are
competing reads and writes.
I expect it will take another week or two to get the I/O scheduler changes
really settled down. Your assistance in thoroughly benching that would be
appreciated.
> 2.4.20aa1 8.24 7.21% 28.587 449134.11 0.10395 0.07086 114
> 2.5.59 9.50 5.50% 36.703 4310.62 0.00000 0.00000 173
> 2.5.59-mm2 35.28 17.69% 10.173 18950.56 0.01010 0.00000 199
boggle.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-24 2:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-24 1:26 big ext3 sequential write improvement in 2.5.51-mm1 gone in 2.5.53-mm1? rwhron
2003-01-24 2:10 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2003-01-24 2:33 ` Nick Piggin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-24 21:19 rwhron
2003-01-24 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2003-01-16 1:50 rwhron
2003-01-16 6:31 ` Andrew Morton
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=20030123181042.025fcbbf.akpm@digeo.com \
--to=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=rwhron@earthlink.net \
/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