From: Marr <marr@flex.com>
To: Linda Walsh <lkml@tlinx.org>
Cc: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
marr@flex.com
Subject: Re: Readahead value 128K? (was Re: Drastic Slowdown of 'fseek()' Calls From 2.4 to 2.6 -- VMM Change?)
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 14:53:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603071453.46768.marr@flex.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <440B6E05.9010609@tlinx.org>
On Sunday 05 March 2006 6:02pm, Linda Walsh wrote:
> Does this happen with a seek call as well, or is this limited
> to fseek?
>
> if you look at "hdparm's" idea of read-ahead, what does it say
> for the device?. I.e.:
>
> hdparm /dev/hda:
>
> There is a line entitled "readahead". What does it say?
Linda,
I don't know (based on your email addressing) if you were directing this
question at me, but since I'm the guy who originally reported this issue,
here are my 'hdparm' results on my (standard Slackware 10.2) ReiserFS
filesystem:
2.6.13 (with 'nolargeio=1' for reiserfs mount):
readahead = 256 (on)
2.6.13 (without 'nolargeio=1' for reiserfs mount):
readahead = 256 (on)
2.4.31 ('nolargeio' option irrelevant/unavailable for 2.4.x):
readahead = 8 (on)
*** Please CC: me on replies -- I'm not subscribed.
Regards,
Bill Marr
> I noticed that this seems to default to "256" sectors, or 128K
> in 2.6.
>
> This may be unrelated, but what does the kernel do with
> this number? I seem to remember this being set to ~8-16 (4-8K)
> in 2.4. I thought it was the number of sectors to read ahead, by
> default, when a read was done, but I haven't noticed a performance
> degradation like I would expect for such a large read-ahead value.
>
> On the other hand: you do seem to be experiencing something consistent
> with that setting. I'm not sure under what circumstances the kernel
> uses the "readahead" value as a number of sectors to read ahead...
>
> Have the disk read routines changed with respect to this value?
>
> -linda
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-07 19:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-24 20:22 Drastic Slowdown of 'fseek()' Calls From 2.4 to 2.6 -- VMM Change? Marr
2006-02-25 5:16 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-26 13:07 ` Ingo Oeser
2006-02-26 13:50 ` Nick Piggin
2006-02-26 14:11 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-02-27 20:52 ` Hans Reiser
2006-02-28 0:34 ` Nick Piggin
2006-02-28 18:42 ` Hans Reiser
2006-02-28 18:51 ` Hans Reiser
2006-02-27 20:24 ` Marr
2006-02-27 21:53 ` Hans Reiser
2006-02-28 0:03 ` Bill Davidsen
2006-02-28 18:38 ` Hans Reiser
2006-03-05 23:02 ` Readahead value 128K? (was Re: Drastic Slowdown of 'fseek()' Calls From 2.4 to 2.6 -- VMM Change?) Linda Walsh
2006-03-07 19:53 ` Marr [this message]
2006-03-07 21:15 ` Linda Walsh
2006-03-12 21:53 ` Marr
2006-03-12 22:15 ` Mark Lord
2006-03-13 4:36 ` Marr
2006-03-13 14:41 ` Mark Lord
2006-03-13 18:15 ` Hans Reiser
2006-03-13 20:00 ` Marr
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=200603071453.46768.marr@flex.com \
--to=marr@flex.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkml@tlinx.org \
--cc=reiserfs-dev@namesys.com \
/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).