* [Fwd: Re: Testing of Reiserfs write speedup patch]
@ 2002-09-25 21:05 James C. Owens
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: James C. Owens @ 2002-09-25 21:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: reiserfs-list, linux-kernel
I am posting some bonnie++, dbench and AIM benchmark results on the
suggestion of Hans Reiser. The below tests were stability/speed tests
after applying the ReiserFS write speedup patch available on the namesys
site. Note that I received a message from Oleg informing me that the
write speedup patch I used is the one largely written by Chris, and
consists of work to prevent unnecessary disk flushes, etc. It is now
part of Chris' data logging patches. This is not the new patch which
removes the 4 kB allocation/balance loop.
Another point to be underlined is that the patch was applied after
applying Andrea Arcangeli's collected patches to the 2.4.19-rc5 (same as
2.4.19 release) kernel, these patches include an asynch I/O
implementation, as well as the O(1) scheduler.
As you can see below, the bonnie++ results are excellent. The dbench
results are in-line with what I have gotten with Andrea's kernels before.
It would be nice to have some comparison to others running the AIM suite
7 (s7110), since it has been released. The results seem pretty good to
me! When I get the time, I will rerun AIM with the ac series and the
stock 2.4.19 kernel and compare.
Please cc me on responses since I don't subscribe to the lkml.
Thanks,
Jim
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Testing of Reiserfs write speedup patch
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:53:03 +0400
From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
To: James C. Owens <owensjc@bellatlantic.net>
CC: Oleg Drokin <green@namesys.com>, Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>
References: <3D8FF28D.3040607@bellatlantic.net>
Excellent. You might want to post your results on lkml and/or
reiserfs-list@namesys.com.:)
Good work Oleg.
Hans
James C. Owens wrote:
> Don't know if this is useful or not... I thought I would send my
> testing results to you guys. I have tested the heck out of my system
> after applying the ReiserFS_speedup-2.4.19-pre6.diff patch to AA's
> 2.4.19-rc5-aa1. This is actually aa's version of the released 2.4.19,
> since 2.4.19-rc5 is the 2.4.19 release. Of note is that AA's kernel
> includes aio and the O(1) scheduler.
>
> I have not noted any fs corruption or other problems during the testing.
>
> System Specs relevant:
>
> Tyan S2460 Tiger MP motherboard
> 2xAthlon MP 1600+ processors
> 1.5 GB RAM
> Mylex AcceleRAID 170 RAID controller with 32 MB onboard cache, running
> 5 IBM DDYS-T18350N 10k rpm U160 SCSI drives in a RAID 5 configuration.
>
> Note /proc/sys/vm/max-readahead in all cases set to 511.
>
> First bonnie++ (2.4.19-aa1 w/o speedup patch)
> Version 1.01d ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> jco-linux 3100M 21468 33 28510 20 17655 10 38814 65 82601 40
> 399.0 3
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> 16 17419 56 +++++ +++ 16464 58 17617 59 +++++ +++
> 7220 40
>
jco-linux,3100M,21468,33,28510,20,17655,10,38814,65,82601,40,399.0,3,16,17419,56,+++++,+++,16464,58,17617,59,+++++,+++,7220,40
>
>
> Second bonnie++ (2.4.19-aa1 w/ speedup patch)
> Version 1.01d ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> jco-linux 3100M 37048 58 39513 30 18319 11 40981 68 93992 47
> 373.0 3
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> 16 17602 90 +++++ +++ 15377 92 14751 83 +++++ +++
> 13464 94
>
jco-linux,3100M,37048,58,39513,30,18319,11,40981,68,93992,47,373.0,3,16,17602,90,+++++,+++,15377,92,14751,83,+++++,+++,13464,94
>
>
> Notice the tremendous speedup on writes, and even a decent speedup on
> sequential reads! I'm a happy man here! (94 MB/sec reads are real
> rates from the combined output of the drives, since I am using a file
> size more than double the memory size. The peak transfer I see during
> actual physical media sequential reads from the controller is about
> 105 MB/sec, pretty close to saturation for the 32-bit PCI bus.) I
> think the combined real sequential output of four DDYS's (i.e. not
> including the parity equivalent) is a bit higher than 100 MB/sec, but
> the PCI bus is constraining here. (Too bad I don't have the AcceleRAID
> 352 or ExtremeRAID 64 bit controllers.)
>
>
> During bonnie++ runs without the speedup patch, the system is really
> prone to read starvation during the big writes. The behaviour with the
> speed-up patch is vastly improved (although not perfect).
>
>
> Dbench results with speedup patch applied (without any tweaking to the
> /proc/sys/vm settings):
>
> Throughput 68.9744 MB/sec (NB=86.2179 MB/sec 689.744 MBit/sec) 8 procs
> Throughput 65.0722 MB/sec (NB=81.3403 MB/sec 650.722 MBit/sec) 16 procs
> Throughput 43.4186 MB/sec (NB=54.2732 MB/sec 434.186 MBit/sec) 32 procs
> Throughput 35.9702 MB/sec (NB=44.9627 MB/sec 359.702 MBit/sec) 64 procs
>
> I ran dbenchs all the way up to 256. Throughput asymptoted out at ~30
> MB/sec. These results are consistent with runs I did a while back with
> the 2.4.18 kernel. No problems were observed.
>
>
> I have also run the AIM suite7 benchmark, since it has now been
> released as open source. The results are attached as a text and ps
> file. A result of peak 1059.7 jobs/minute, with a sustained rate of
> 958.2 jobs/minute seems excellent to me. The machine was still running
> at a total of 930.2 jobs/minute at the crossover point, where 963
> simultaneous multiuser processes were running. (Yep, the load was at
> ~1000.) Believe it or not, the system GUI was still very usable,
> thanks to the O(1) scheduler.
>
>
> I ran the same benchmark on a dual PIII 700 with the SuSE 2.4.18
> default kernel and a single Maxtor 30 GB hard drive, and the peak rate
> was at 135 jobs/minute, a factor of 7.85 difference from the dual
> Athlon RAID system with the patches.
>
>
> Anyway, I was more interested in testing stability than speed on the
> dual Athlon. The AIM benchmark completed with no problems whatsover.
> Not a single error or warning logged in /var/log/messages. File system
> is perfectly fine - no corruption or other problems.
>
>
> As a result of this testing, looks like the write speedup patch is a
> keeper, at least for me!
>
>
> Jim Owens
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Tasks Jobs/Min JTI Real CPU Jobs/sec/task
>Benchmark Version Machine Run Date
>AIM Multiuser Benchmark - Suite VII "1.1" JCO-LINUX Sep 23 10:10:36 2002
>1 101.4 100 57.4 7.6 1.6893
>2 195.2 99 59.6 13.3 1.6267
>3 301.3 99 57.9 16.4 1.6741
>4 346.7 98 67.1 17.3 1.4447
>5 416.1 97 69.9 24.3 1.3871
>6 484.3 97 72.1 24.6 1.3454
>7 535.7 97 76.0 32.7 1.2755
>8 594.5 98 78.3 36.5 1.2385
>10 675.6 97 86.2 43.1 1.1259
>14 761.6 97 107.0 59.7 0.9067
>18 835.3 97 125.4 74.6 0.7735
>26 919.0 97 164.7 107.2 0.5891
>29 944.6 96 178.7 111.8 0.5429
>35 995.9 96 204.5 137.9 0.4742
>47 1031.3 96 265.2 182.1 0.3657
>59 1030.2 94 333.3 232.7 0.2910
>71 1055.6 94 391.5 274.1 0.2478
>97 1046.9 94 539.2 374.3 0.1799
>107 1014.1 95 614.1 413.4 0.1580
>128 973.3 96 765.4 487.4 0.1267
>149 1031.8 96 840.5 575.4 0.1154
>193 1017.3 95 1104.2 739.1 0.0878
>212 1059.7 95 1164.3 816.5 0.0833
>251 1023.3 92 1427.6 963.2 0.0679
>290 994.8 93 1696.6 1111.3 0.0572
>375 1003.2 93 2175.5 1431.0 0.0446
>460 981.1 94 2728.8 1739.8 0.0355
>545 995.1 92 3187.5 2082.8 0.0304
>729 956.0 92 4438.0 2792.4 0.0219
>805 968.8 92 4835.9 3099.0 0.0201
>963 930.2 92 6025.0 3718.4 0.0161
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2002-09-25 21:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-09-25 21:05 [Fwd: Re: Testing of Reiserfs write speedup patch] James C. Owens
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).