From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264359AbUBKUxO (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:53:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266153AbUBKUxO (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:53:14 -0500 Received: from nsmtp.pacific.net.th ([203.121.130.117]:63880 "EHLO nsmtp.pacific.net.th") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264359AbUBKUxI (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:53:08 -0500 From: Michael Frank To: Rik van Riel , Jon Burgess Subject: Re: ext2/3 performance regression in 2.6 vs 2.4 for small interleaved writes Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 05:02:39 +0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Cc: linux kernel References: In-Reply-To: X-OS: KDE 3 on GNU/Linux MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402120502.39300.mhf@linuxmail.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 12 February 2004 04:28, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Jon Burgess wrote: > > > Write speed in MB/s using an ext2 filesystem for 1 and 2 streams: > > Num streams: 1 2 > > linux-2.4.22 10.47 6.98 > > linux-2.6.2 9.71 0.34 > > > During the disk light is on solid and it really slows any other disk > > access. It looks like the disk is continuously seeking backwards and > > forwards, perhaps re-writing the meta data. > > Just for fun, could you also try measuring how long it takes > to read back the files in question ? > > Both individually and in parallel... > 2.4 has a deadline scheduler. 2.6 default is anticipatory. Could you please boot with scheduler=deadline to compare apples with apples. Regards Michael