From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265992AbTGAF6u (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2003 01:58:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265993AbTGAF6t (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2003 01:58:49 -0400 Received: from anumail5.anu.edu.au ([150.203.2.45]:5025 "EHLO anu.edu.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265992AbTGAF6s (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2003 01:58:48 -0400 Message-ID: <3F012663.5040704@cyberone.com.au> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 16:12:51 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Wong CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Mike Sullivan , Bill Hartner , Ray Venditti Subject: Re: Evaluation of three I/O schedulers References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sender-Domain: cyberone.com.au X-Spam-Score: (-2.8) X-Spam-Tests: DATE_IN_PAST_06_12,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Peter Wong wrote: >We used 2.5.72+mm1 to evaluate three I/O schedulers, namely >anticipatory, deadline and complete fair queueing under a very heavy >database workload on an 8-way Pentium 4 machine. The workload is a >decision support system doing mostly sequential I/O and each run takes >about one hour. All three runs finished completely without encountering >functional problems, and achieved similar performance level. > >The 8-way machine has Pentium 4 2.0 GHz processors, 16 GB physical >memory, 2MB L3 cache, 8 FC controllers with 80 disks. Hyperthreading >was turned on for the three runs. The CPU utilization is similar for all >three runs: 65% user, 7% system and 28% idle. > Hi Peter, How many block devices are being used at once in your tests? I would be interested to see profiles of AS and DL if possible. Thanks. Nick