From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268355AbUHYC2R (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:28:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268388AbUHYC2R (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:28:17 -0400 Received: from smtp201.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([216.136.129.91]:65118 "HELO smtp201.mail.sc5.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S268355AbUHYC2O (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:28:14 -0400 Message-ID: <412BF93A.6000902@yahoo.com.au> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:28:10 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040810 Debian/1.7.2-2 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Massimo Cetra CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Production comparison between 2.4.27 and 2.6.8.1 References: <002401c489e4$d7903ec0$0600640a@guendalin> In-Reply-To: <002401c489e4$d7903ec0$0600640a@guendalin> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Massimo Cetra wrote: > Nick Piggin wrote: > > >>>Is this issue being analyzed ? >>>Should we hope in an improvement sometime? >>>Or I'll have to use 2.4 to have good performance ? >>> >> >>You booted with elevator=deadline and things still didn't >>improve though, correct? If so, then the problem should be >>found and fixed. > > > Yes, that's correct. > Thanks. I'll try next versions of kernel. > I dont think 2.8.9-RC1 includes something regarding this issue. > OK, can you try testing different values of /sys/block/???/queue/read_ahead_kb and /sys/block/???/queue/nr_requests You should set '???' for all disks involved. First, try setting read_ahead_kb to 0, then 256. If those values don't change anything, set nr_requests to 1024.