From: Jason Holmes <jholmes@psu.edu>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: IO degradation in 2.4.17-pre2 vs. 2.4.16
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:16:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C092CAB.4D1541F4@psu.edu> (raw)
I saw in a previous thread that the interactivity improvements in
2.4.17-pre2 had some adverse effect on IO throughput and since I was
already evaluating 2.4.16 for a somewhat large fileserving project, I
threw 2.4.17-pre2 on to see what has changed. Throughput while serving
a large number of clients is important to me, so my tests have included
using dbench to try to see how things scale as clients increase.
2.4.16:
Throughput 116.098 MB/sec (NB=145.123 MB/sec 1160.98 MBit/sec) 1 procs
Throughput 206.604 MB/sec (NB=258.255 MB/sec 2066.04 MBit/sec) 2 procs
Throughput 210.364 MB/sec (NB=262.955 MB/sec 2103.64 MBit/sec) 4 procs
Throughput 213.397 MB/sec (NB=266.747 MB/sec 2133.97 MBit/sec) 8 procs
Throughput 210.989 MB/sec (NB=263.736 MB/sec 2109.89 MBit/sec) 16
procs
Throughput 138.713 MB/sec (NB=173.391 MB/sec 1387.13 MBit/sec) 32
procs
Throughput 117.729 MB/sec (NB=147.162 MB/sec 1177.29 MBit/sec) 64
procs
Throughput 66.7354 MB/sec (NB=83.4193 MB/sec 667.354 MBit/sec) 128
procs
2.4.17-pre2:
Throughput 96.2302 MB/sec (NB=120.288 MB/sec 962.302 MBit/sec) 1 procs
Throughput 226.679 MB/sec (NB=283.349 MB/sec 2266.79 MBit/sec) 2 procs
Throughput 223.955 MB/sec (NB=279.944 MB/sec 2239.55 MBit/sec) 4 procs
Throughput 224.533 MB/sec (NB=280.666 MB/sec 2245.33 MBit/sec) 8 procs
Throughput 153.672 MB/sec (NB=192.09 MB/sec 1536.72 MBit/sec) 16 procs
Throughput 91.3464 MB/sec (NB=114.183 MB/sec 913.464 MBit/sec) 32
procs
Throughput 64.876 MB/sec (NB=81.095 MB/sec 648.76 MBit/sec) 64 procs
Throughput 54.9774 MB/sec (NB=68.7217 MB/sec 549.774 MBit/sec) 128
procs
Throughput 136.522 MB/sec (NB=170.652 MB/sec 1365.22 MBit/sec) 1 procs
Throughput 223.682 MB/sec (NB=279.603 MB/sec 2236.82 MBit/sec) 2 procs
Throughput 222.806 MB/sec (NB=278.507 MB/sec 2228.06 MBit/sec) 4 procs
Throughput 224.427 MB/sec (NB=280.534 MB/sec 2244.27 MBit/sec) 8 procs
Throughput 152.286 MB/sec (NB=190.358 MB/sec 1522.86 MBit/sec) 16
procs
Throughput 92.044 MB/sec (NB=115.055 MB/sec 920.44 MBit/sec) 32 procs
Throughput 78.0881 MB/sec (NB=97.6101 MB/sec 780.881 MBit/sec) 64
procs
Throughput 66.1573 MB/sec (NB=82.6966 MB/sec 661.573 MBit/sec) 128
procs
Throughput 117.95 MB/sec (NB=147.438 MB/sec 1179.5 MBit/sec) 1 procs
Throughput 212.469 MB/sec (NB=265.586 MB/sec 2124.69 MBit/sec) 2 procs
Throughput 214.763 MB/sec (NB=268.453 MB/sec 2147.63 MBit/sec) 4 procs
Throughput 214.007 MB/sec (NB=267.509 MB/sec 2140.07 MBit/sec) 8 procs
Throughput 96.6572 MB/sec (NB=120.821 MB/sec 966.572 MBit/sec) 16
procs
Throughput 48.1342 MB/sec (NB=60.1677 MB/sec 481.342 MBit/sec) 32
procs
Throughput 71.3444 MB/sec (NB=89.1806 MB/sec 713.444 MBit/sec) 64
procs
Throughput 59.258 MB/sec (NB=74.0724 MB/sec 592.58 MBit/sec) 128 procs
I have included three runs for 2.4.17-pre2 to show how inconsistent its
results are; 2.4.16 didn't have this problem to this extent. bonnie++
numbers seem largely unchanged between kernels, coming in around:
------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
2512M 14348 81 49495 26 24438 16 16040 96 55006 15 373.7 1
------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
16 3087 99 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 3175 100 +++++ +++ 11042 100
The test machine is an IBM 342 with 2 1.26 GHz P3 processors and 1.25 GB
of RAM. The above numbers were generated off of 1 10K RPM SCSI disk
hanging off of an Adaptec aix7899 controller.
--
Jason Holmes
next reply other threads:[~2001-12-01 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-01 19:16 Jason Holmes [this message]
2001-12-01 21:34 ` IO degradation in 2.4.17-pre2 vs. 2.4.16 Andrew Morton
2001-12-01 22:35 ` Jason Holmes
2001-12-03 19:22 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-12-03 23:32 ` Jason Holmes
2001-12-11 22:37 ` Bill Davidsen
[not found] <fa.n0jjs6v.7ms98a@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.jlqjvuv.348ign@ifi.uio.no>
2001-12-11 22:37 ` Dan Maas
2001-12-11 21:44 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-12-11 23:14 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-12 0:23 ` Andrew Morton
2001-12-12 0:52 ` J Sloan
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=3C092CAB.4D1541F4@psu.edu \
--to=jholmes@psu.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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