From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
Cc: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] max bomb segment tuning with read latency 2 patch in contest
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 22:14:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3DF191DA.A88E2C1A@digeo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 200212071709.50023.conman@kolivas.net
Con Kolivas wrote:
>
> ...
> >If the SMP machine is using scsi then that tends to make the elevator
> >changes less effective. Because the disk sort-of has its own internal
> >elevator which in my testing on a Fujitsu disk has the same ill-advised
> >design as the kernel's elevator: it treats reads and writes in a similar
> >manner.
>
> These are ide disks, in the same format as those used in the UP machine, so it
> still should be showing the same effect? I think higher numbers in UP would
> increase the resolution more for these results - apart from that is there any
> disadvantage to doing it in SMP? If you think it's worth running them in UP
> mode I'll do that.
Oh, OK. I was guessing, and guessed wrong. No, I don't expect you'd
see much difference switching to UP for those tests which are sensitive
to the IO scheduler policy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-07 6:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-12-07 5:20 [BENCHMARK] max bomb segment tuning with read latency 2 patch in contest Con Kolivas
2002-12-07 5:55 ` Andrew Morton
2002-12-07 6:09 ` Con Kolivas
2002-12-07 6:14 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-12-07 6:15 ` GrandMasterLee
2002-12-07 6:20 ` GrandMasterLee
2002-12-07 6:45 ` [BENCHMARK] max bomb segment tuning with read latency 2 patchin contest Andrew Morton
2002-12-07 13:29 ` [BENCHMARK] max bomb segment tuning with read latency 2 patch in contest Con Kolivas
2002-12-10 10:50 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2002-12-10 10:55 ` Marc-Christian Petersen
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=3DF191DA.A88E2C1A@digeo.com \
--to=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=conman@kolivas.net \
--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