From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.39-mm1
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 14:30:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021001123013.GS3867@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200210012219.53464.conman@kolivas.net>
On Tue, Oct 01 2002, Con Kolivas wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tuesday 01 Oct 2002 8:20 pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 30 2002, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > io_load:
> > > > > Kernel Time CPU Ratio
> > > > > 2.4.19 216.05 33% 3.19
> > > > > 2.5.38 887.76 8% 13.11
> > > > > 2.5.38-mm3 105.17 70% 1.55
> > > > > 2.5.39 229.4 34% 3.4
> > > > > 2.5.39-mm1 239.5 33% 3.4
> > > >
> > > > I think I'll set fifo_batch to 16 again...
> > >
> > > As not to compare oranges and apples, I'd very much like to see a
> > > 2.5.39-mm1 vs 2.5.39-mm1 with fifo_batch=16. Con, would you do that?
> > > Thanks!
> >
> > The presence of /proc/sys/vm/fifo_batch should make that pretty easy.
>
> Thanks. That made it a lot easier and faster, and made me curious enough to
> create a family or very interesting results. All these are with 2.5.39-mm1
> with fifo_batch set to 1->16, average of three runs. The first result is the
> unmodified 2.5.39-mm1 (fifo_batch=32).
Ah excellent, thanks a lot!
> io_load:
> Kernel Time CPU% Ratio
> 2.5.39-mm1 239.5 32 3.54
> 2539mm1fb16 131.2 57 1.94
> 2539mm1fb8 109.1 68 1.61
> 2539mm1fb4 146.4 51 2.16
> 2539mm1fb2 112.7 65 1.67
> 2539mm1fb1 125.4 60 1.85
>
> What's most interesting is the variation was small until the number was <8;
> then the variation between runs increased. Dare I say it there appears to be
> a sweet spot in the results.
Yes it's an interesting curve. What makes it interesting is that 8 is
better than 16. Both allow one seek to be dispatched, they only differ
in the streamed amount of data we allow to dispatch. 8 will give you
either 1 seek, or 8*256 == 2048 sectors == 1MiB. 16 will give you 1 seek
or 2MiB of streamed I/O.
Tests with other io benchmarks need to be considered as well. And I need
a bit of time to digest this :-). The 8 vs 16 numbers are not what I
expected.
But the deadline io scheduler looks damn good in this test, if I have to
say so myself.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-01 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-30 9:41 [BENCHMARK] 2.5.39-mm1 Con Kolivas
2002-09-30 19:36 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-30 20:36 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-01 10:16 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 10:15 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] ` <3D9976D9.C06466B@digeo.com>
2002-10-01 12:19 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-01 12:30 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2002-10-01 13:44 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-01 15:49 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 23:41 ` jw schultz
[not found] ` <5.1.0.14.2.20021001190123.00b3cdc8@pop.gmx.net>
[not found] ` <20021001172200.GH5755@suse.de>
2002-10-02 2:55 ` Con Kolivas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20021001123013.GS3867@suse.de \
--to=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=conman@kolivas.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).