Re: [BENCHMARK] I/O regression after 2.6.0-test5

From: Nick Piggin
Date: Mon Oct 20 2003 - 03:14:53 EST




Andrew Morton wrote:

Nick Piggin <piggin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



rwhron@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


There was about a 50% regression in jobs/minute in AIM7
database workload on quad P3 Xeon. The CPU time has not
gone up, so the extra run time is coming from something
else. (I/O or I/O scheduler?)

tiobench sequential reads has a significant regression too.

Regression appears unrelated to filesystem type.

dbench was not affected.

The AIM7 was run on ext2.


Yeah I'd say its all due to the IO scheduler. There is a problem
I'm thinking about how to fix - its the likely cause of this too.



What change do you think it was due to?



I was thinking: [PATCH] fix AS crappy performance

(It still doesn't work properly)

It's rather strange that test6 is slow but test6-mm is not: generally the
IO scheduler regressions enter -mm first ;)


But if test6-mm isn't slow then maybe it is due to something else

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/