public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: rwhron@earthlink.net
To: akpm@digeo.com
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 20:26:18 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030124012618.GA12005@rushmore> (raw)

>> >lovely.  These two files have perfectly intermingled blocks.  

>> Writeback? or read?

> Both.

>  The fileystems need fixing....

Did you add a secret sauce to 2.5.59-mm2?  10x sequential
write improvement on ext3 for multiple tiobench threads.

Quad P3 Xeon (4GB ram)
8 GB files
4K blocksize
32 threads
Rate = MB/sec
latency in milliseconds

Sequential Writes ext3
                              Avg       Maximum     Lat%     Lat%    CPU
Kernel       Rate  (CPU%)   Latency     Latency      >2s     >10s    Eff
----------  ------------------------------------------------------------
2.4.20aa1    11.85 72.77%    11.814    21802.73  0.05036  0.00000     16
2.5.59        3.42 17.36%    83.976  3109518.52  0.11253  0.05088     20
2.5.59-mm2   32.39 34.28%     7.742   340597.62  0.04287  0.01765     94

Similar improvement for seq writes for 2, 4, 8, 16, 64, 128, 256 threads.

Sequential reads on ext3 with 2.5.59-mm2 improves around 3x for various 
thread counts.  Below is 32 threads.

Sequential Reads ext3
                              Avg       Maximum     Lat%     Lat%    CPU
Kernel       Rate  (CPU%)   Latency     Latency      >2s     >10s    Eff
----------  ------------------------------------------------------------
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


-- 
Randy Hron
http://home.earthlink.net/~rwhron/kernel/bigbox.html


             reply	other threads:[~2003-01-24  1:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-01-24  1:26 rwhron [this message]
2003-01-24  2:10 ` big ext3 sequential write improvement in 2.5.51-mm1 gone in 2.5.53-mm1? Andrew Morton
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=20030124012618.GA12005@rushmore \
    --to=rwhron@earthlink.net \
    --cc=akpm@digeo.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.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