From: Magnus Andersson <magan029@und.ida.liu.se>
To: rwhron@earthlink.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] I/O regression after 2.6.0-test5
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 15:52:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031024155241.A19052@student.liu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031020003745.GA2794@rushmore>
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 08:37:45PM -0400, rwhron@earthlink.net wrote:
> There was about a 50% regression in jobs/minute in AIM7
> database workload on quad P3 Xeon. The CPU time has not
> gone up, so the extra run time is coming from something
> else. (I/O or I/O scheduler?)
Hello all!
This sounds like the same problem I had with the 2.6 kernel.
I posted some stuff on the kernel-list about this.
Make a search for "2.6.0-test4 parallel seek & read problem"
on google to read my posts.
I think I ran into two different unrelated problems.
First problem was solved, but second problem is still there.
It is probably the same you are having.
My finding was that the problem is not the scheduler, but some
other part of the IO system.
1 seek & read issued by a program goes to the disk as 2 different
seeks & 2 reads, thus only giving 50 % performance.
I think the problem is that the elevators are flushed so often
so merges that should happend never happens.
/Magnus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-24 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-20 0:37 [BENCHMARK] I/O regression after 2.6.0-test5 rwhron
2003-10-20 1:35 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-20 4:52 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-20 8:12 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-20 4:51 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-20 7:55 ` venom
2003-10-21 4:49 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-24 13:52 ` Magnus Andersson [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-10-21 13:05 rwhron
2003-10-21 15:57 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-21 21:07 ` venom
2003-10-22 9:54 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-22 18:30 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-22 19:08 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-23 2:24 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-23 3:48 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-23 20:35 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-23 23:07 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-24 0:10 rwhron
2003-10-24 12:46 rwhron
2003-10-24 23:43 rwhron
2003-10-26 10:38 rwhron
2003-10-27 23:49 ` Dave Olien
2003-10-27 23:33 John Hawkes
2003-10-29 0:38 rwhron
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=20031024155241.A19052@student.liu.se \
--to=magan029@und.ida.liu.se \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).