From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
To: Jimmie Mayfield <mayfield+usenet@sackheads.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Interesting disk throughput performance problem
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 13:20:24 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B5A9AD8.FADBA3CF@namesys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010721233313.A15232@sackheads.org>
I'm just guessing here, but is write caching active on one but not the other?
Hans
Jimmie Mayfield wrote:
>
> Hi. I'm running into some disk throughput issues that I can't explain.
> Hopefully someone reading this can offer an explanation.
>
> One of my machines is running 2.4.5 and has 2 hard drives: a 7200 rpm
> ATA100 Maxtor and a 5400 rpm ATA33 IBM. Each drive is a master on its own
> controller (AMI CMD649 as found on the IWill KT266-R). Both drives contain
> reiserfs 3.6x filesystems.
>
> By all local benchmarks, the 7200 rpm drive is the faster drive. But this
> doesn't seem to be the case for large files originating from remote clients.
> Witness:
>
> My crude test involves scp'ing a 100MB file from another machine on my home
> network over 100bT ethernet.
>
> 1) scp to the 5400rpm drive: roughly 10MB/sec.
> 2) scp to the 7200rpm drive: roughly 2MB/sec.
>
> I've tried 'tail' and 'notail' mount options with no change (as expected since
> this is a single large file). I suspect that the machine would become CPU-bound
> somewhere in the 20MB/sec range (see below for my reasoning).
>
> I see the same sort of behavior using Samba though not nearly as
> pronounced (the 5400rpm drive is merely 2x as fast as the 7200rpm drive).
>
> Okay. Since the test involved 2 separate drives with different geometries,
> I figured this might be due to physical block location. Perhaps the file
> is getting allocated to the fastest cylinders on the 5400 rpm drive and
> the slowest cylinders on the 7200 rpm drive. Or it could be a fragmentation
> issue.
>
> So I tried the test locally: with the file stored on the 5400rpm drive,
> scp it to localhost and write it to the 7200rpm drive. Results were a little
> below 10MB/sec (CPU near 100% presumably due to encrypting/decrypting on
> the fly).
>
> Any ideas why the 7200rpm drive performs so poorly for remote clients but
> performs wonderfully well when those same operations are performed locally?
>
> Jimmie
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-07-22 9:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-22 3:33 Interesting disk throughput performance problem Jimmie Mayfield
2001-07-22 9:20 ` Hans Reiser [this message]
2001-07-22 14:07 ` toon
2001-07-22 14:41 ` Hans Reiser
2001-07-22 10:29 ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-07-22 10:44 ` Mike Black
2001-07-24 15:06 ` Jimmie Mayfield
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-07-24 17:11 Tim Schmielau
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=3B5A9AD8.FADBA3CF@namesys.com \
--to=reiser@namesys.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mayfield+usenet@sackheads.org \
/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