attached mail follows:
Mark Hahn wrote:
> > have trouble with the readings bonnie gives me.
>
> um, that's because you used too-small a file. try it with -s
> at least 3x the size of ram.
>
> so far, reports are fairly consistent that Rik's patch cause a minor hit
> in sustained disk IO, and some real benefit on low-memory machines.
I can't do such a test because my swap is on the same drive as the one i
took those tests. But, I ran it at 384MB (128MB of ram) on my other drive
and this is what it gave me.
-------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input--
--Random--
-Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block---
--Seeks---
Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec
%CPU
1* 384 4496 98.4 14440 18.7 7997 20.5 4656 95.6 13092 22.6 98.7
2.8
OK, now before you go saying "i told you so" let me just say that this
reading is almost no worse and in some places better than the 100MB test i
did before doing the patch. Also, this was done on the 20GB ext2fs
partition / drive which is slave to the one i originally did the tests on.
I'd have to reboot to test without the patch but i'm not doing that unless
i crash. I did the test again at the default size (like i did the first
two tests) on this same partition.. to show you just how little increasing
the size matters
-------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input--
--Random--
-Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block---
--Seeks---
Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec
%CPU
1* 100 4530 99.2 15479 19.3 9769 24.6 4558 94.0 12853 21.8 772.5
17.8
As you can see, there are only minor differences. The VM patch kicks ass
..hands down.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:15 EST