From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:45:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:45:04 -0500 Received: from mailrelay1.lanl.gov ([128.165.4.101]:54506 "EHLO mailrelay1.lanl.gov") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:45:03 -0500 Subject: Re: 2.5.65-mm2 From: Steven Cole To: Andrew Morton Cc: Linux Kernel , linux-mm@kvack.org In-Reply-To: <20030319012115.466970fd.akpm@digeo.com> References: <20030319012115.466970fd.akpm@digeo.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0.2-5mdk Date: 19 Mar 2003 12:51:28 -0700 Message-Id: <1048103489.1962.87.camel@spc9.esa.lanl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2003-03-19 at 02:21, Andrew Morton wrote: > > http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/2.5/2.5.65/2.5.65-mm2/ > I am seeing a significant degradation of interactivity under load with recent -mm kernels. The load is dbench on a reiserfs file system with increasing numbers of clients. The test machine is single PIII, IDE, 256MB memory, all kernels PREEMPT. Specifying elevator=deadline improved the response of 2.5.65-mm2 somewhat, but it still eventually became intolerably slow with sufficient load. Interactivity tests consisted of switching between desktops with two instances of Mozilla 1.3 on separate desktops, and Evolution 1.2.2 on another desktop. Additional tests included shaking the window and wiggling the scrollbar. The third and fourth columns list the number of dbench clients at which interactivity becomes poor, or intolerable, defined here as getting a response after: good less than 1 second poor seconds intolerable tens of seconds kernel interactivity under load (dbench clients) good poor intolerable 2.5.65-bk 56* 2.5.65-mm1 <8 16 24 2.5.65-mm2 <8 16 24 2.5.65-mm2 deadline <8 20 28 *2.5.65-bk was still performing very well at dbench 56. I'll continue to test up to 128 clients. 2.5.65-bk was updated with a bk pull this morning. Steven From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: 2.5.65-mm2 From: Steven Cole In-Reply-To: <20030319012115.466970fd.akpm@digeo.com> References: <20030319012115.466970fd.akpm@digeo.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 19 Mar 2003 12:51:28 -0700 Message-Id: <1048103489.1962.87.camel@spc9.esa.lanl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Linux Kernel , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, 2003-03-19 at 02:21, Andrew Morton wrote: > > http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/2.5/2.5.65/2.5.65-mm2/ > I am seeing a significant degradation of interactivity under load with recent -mm kernels. The load is dbench on a reiserfs file system with increasing numbers of clients. The test machine is single PIII, IDE, 256MB memory, all kernels PREEMPT. Specifying elevator=deadline improved the response of 2.5.65-mm2 somewhat, but it still eventually became intolerably slow with sufficient load. Interactivity tests consisted of switching between desktops with two instances of Mozilla 1.3 on separate desktops, and Evolution 1.2.2 on another desktop. Additional tests included shaking the window and wiggling the scrollbar. The third and fourth columns list the number of dbench clients at which interactivity becomes poor, or intolerable, defined here as getting a response after: good less than 1 second poor seconds intolerable tens of seconds kernel interactivity under load (dbench clients) good poor intolerable 2.5.65-bk 56* 2.5.65-mm1 <8 16 24 2.5.65-mm2 <8 16 24 2.5.65-mm2 deadline <8 20 28 *2.5.65-bk was still performing very well at dbench 56. I'll continue to test up to 128 clients. 2.5.65-bk was updated with a bk pull this morning. Steven -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org