Re: [PATCH] 2.6.0 - Watchdog patches (BK consistency checks)
From: Eric D. Mudama
Date: Tue Dec 30 2003 - 14:58:34 EST
On Tue, Dec 30 at 13:13, Andy Isaacson wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 08:36:15AM -0500, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
The consistency check definitely should not take 15 minutes. It should
be (much) less than 30 seconds. What is the hardware you're running on?
I'm running on an Athlon 2 GHz (XP 2400+) with 512MB and a 7200RPM IDE
disk, and I can do a complete clone (with full data copy and consistency
check) of the 2.4 tree in 1:40. That was with cold caches; with the
sfile copies and "checkout:get", a half-gig isn't enough to cache
everything. The consistency check is about 19 seconds (bk -r check -acv).
For what it is worth:
AMD Duron 950MHz, 768MB RAM
7200RPM 80GB Quantum Viper IDE drive, 26% full
phat-penguin:~/src/linux-2.5> time bk -r check -acv
100% |=================================================================| OK
42.710u 5.770s 2:04.63 38.8% 0+0k 0+0io 74078pf+0w
over 2 minutes of wall time, 42 seconds of "user" time... (if I'm reading it right), without primed disk caches.
The 2nd run, half a minute later:
phat-penguin:~/src/linux-2.5> time bk -r check -acv
100% |=================================================================| OK
41.900u 3.080s 0:45.53 98.7% 0+0k 0+0io 74078pf+0w
...would appear to show that BK's checksumming, on my system, is
constrained near 41 seconds of calculation time, and the difference
between the user and the wall-clock time is basically time spent
waiting for the disk to do all its reads.
I guess in that case, it'd be interesting to see what the user and
wall times were for the original poster who reported a 15+ minute
integrity check.
--eric
--
Eric D. Mudama
edmudama@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
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/