public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willy Tarreau <willy@w.ods.org>
To: Grant Coady <gcoady@gmail.com>
Cc: Markus Rechberger <mrechberger@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why is 2.4.32 four times faster than 2.6.14.6??
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 10:57:41 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060108095741.GH7142@w.ods.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <gre1s1lkr687o2npgom26gqq3etgjdjgpo@4ax.com>

Hi Grant,

On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 06:28:53PM +1100, Grant Coady wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 07:58:09 +0100, Markus Rechberger <mrechberger@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >Were there any other processes running during the test?
> box runs same config both kernels: the usual light load ~100% idle ;)
> >what does "vmstat 1" show up during the test?
> 
> grant@deltree:~$ uname -r
> 2.6.14.6a
> grant@deltree:~$ vmstat 1
> procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- --system-- ----cpu----
>  r  b   swpd   free   buff  cache   si   so    bi    bo   in    cs us sy id wa
> [...]
>  0  0      0  63800  11520  32352    0    0     0     0  110    18  0  0 100  0
>  0  0      0  63800  11520  32352    0    0     0     0  106    17  1  0 99  0
>  3  0      0  63560  11520  32352    0    0     0     0  346   502 22  9 69  0
>  1  0      0  63560  11520  32352    0    0     0     0 1057  1987 59 41  0  0
>  1  0      0  63560  11520  32352    0    0     0     0 1062  2011 59 41  0  0
>  1  0      0  63560  11520  32352    0    0     0     0 1053  2001 50 50  0  0
>  1  0      0  63500  11596  32352    0    0     0   136 1054  1974 61 39  0  0
>  1  0      0  63500  11596  32352    0    0     0     0 1040  1978 50 50  0  0
>  0  0      0  63620  11596  32352    0    0     0     0  799  1425 45 27 29  0
>  0  0      0  63620  11596  32352    0    0     0     0  104    12  0  0 100  0
>  0  0      0  63620  11596  32352    0    0     0     0  103    10  0  0 100  0
> 
> grant@deltree:~$ uname -r
> 2.4.32-hf32.1
> grant@deltree:~$ vmstat 1
> procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- --system-- ----cpu----
>  r  b   swpd   free   buff  cache   si   so    bi    bo   in    cs us sy id wa
> [...]
>  0  0      0  83192   6532  21404    0    0     0     0  104    12  0  1 99  0
>  0  0      0  83152   6572  21404    0    0     0    80  116    24  0  1 99  0
>  1  0      0  82952   6572  21404    0    0     0     0  168   130  6  5 89  0
>  2  0      0  82952   6572  21404    0    0     0     0  667  1019 65 35  0  0
>  0  0      0  83152   6572  21404    0    0     0     0  297   378 41 10 49  0
>  0  0      0  83152   6572  21404    0    0     0     0  104     9  0  1 99  0
>  0  0      0  83064   6656  21404    0    0     0   304  169   121  0  1 99  0
>  0  0      0  83064   6656  21404    0    0     0     0  137    42  0  2 98  0

It's rather strange that 2.6 *eats* CPU apparently doing nothing ! At first
I thought about a PIO/DMA problemn but we can clearly see that there's no
IO in on both vmstat. Could you please retest :
  - without the pipe (remove '| cut ...') to avoid inter-process
    communications
  - with cat instead of grep to ensure you don't spend time processing
    anything

You should be able to find one simple pattern which makes the problem
appear/disappear on 2.6. At least, 'cat x.log >/dev/null' should not
take time or that time should be spent in I/O. I remember an old test
I did a long time ago which behaved badly on 2.6, it consisted in lots
of pipes (eg: dd bs=1 | dd bs=1 |...). May be you're on a simplified
form of this.

> -- 
> Thanks,
> Grant.
> http://bugsplatter.mine.nu/

Cheers,
Willy


  reply	other threads:[~2006-01-08  9:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-08  6:16 Why is 2.4.32 four times faster than 2.6.14.6?? Grant Coady
2006-01-08  6:58 ` Markus Rechberger
2006-01-08  7:18   ` Bernd Eckenfels
2006-01-08  7:42     ` Grant Coady
2006-01-08  8:00       ` Bernd Eckenfels
2006-01-08  8:11         ` Con Kolivas
2006-01-08  9:12           ` Bernd Eckenfels
2006-01-08 12:04       ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-08 19:20         ` Grant Coady
2006-02-22 19:27           ` Enrico Weigelt
2006-02-22 23:17             ` Adrian Bunk
2006-01-08  7:28   ` Grant Coady
2006-01-08  9:57     ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2006-01-08 10:23       ` Bernd Eckenfels
2006-01-08 10:54         ` Willy Tarreau
2006-01-08 11:09           ` Bernd Eckenfels
2006-01-08 11:16             ` Willy Tarreau
2006-01-08 11:18         ` Grant Coady
2006-01-09  2:37           ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-01-09  2:46             ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09  2:59             ` Grant Coady
2006-01-09  6:56             ` Grant Coady
2006-01-08 11:05       ` Grant Coady
2006-01-08 18:21         ` Octavio Alvarez Piza
2006-01-08 19:27           ` Grant Coady

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=20060108095741.GH7142@w.ods.org \
    --to=willy@w.ods.org \
    --cc=gcoady@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mrechberger@gmail.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