linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* disk I/O slower with kernel 2.4.9
@ 2001-08-18 23:23 Luigi Genoni
  2001-08-19  0:40 ` Rik van Riel
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Luigi Genoni @ 2001-08-18 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

HI,
I was just starting to test eavily linux 2.4.9 if i can use it in a
production environment.
The platform target i am considering is the x86 family processor (Mostly
AMD Athlon), with no more than 512 MByte RAM and scsi disks.

The first thing i noticed is that, while  context switch performances
has improoved a lot, disk I/O is mutch slower. This is true for both ext2
and reiserFS, but maybe reiserFS is suffering the effects a little more
than ext2.
That can be even felt by a normal user, just doing a cp of a directory
containing a lot of small files.

That also has big impacts with normal compilations.
just making time make -j 2 bzImage with kernel source 2.4.9
gives me:

real    3m36.041s
user    2m2.950s
sys     0m9.740s

while compiling the same sources running kernel 2.4.7 gives:

real    2m28.350s
user    1m56.150s
sys     0m5.262s

Every single operation that has to do with read and write activities
on disks is simply slower.

That has big repercussion with uses like NFS server, and web server
with khttpd as primary server and apache as the secondary one.

Even more affected are mysql performances and everything relates to FS
speed.

The test machine is a AMD Athlon 1300 Mhz, 200 FSB, with 256 Mbyte RAM
133 Mhz and an adaptec 2940 UW2 with two seagate scsi 3 disks. Mother
board is an abit KT7A-RAID (KT133 VT82C686 chipsets) but i am not using
any ATA disk.

kernel is compiled for athlon, gcc 2.95.3, binutils 2.11.90.0.27

This should not be a problem related to a via since the server has always
been stable with all 2.4.X kernels compiled for athlon, with mtrr and
3dnow enabled, and all bios settings setted to maximize performances.
The AIC7XXX adaptec driver i compied statically inside of the kernel is
the new one, with firware rebuild enabled,
253 tag queues, and 5000m sec for reset.

To be sure i made some tests also on a k6 II, and on a PIII 450 with the
same adaptec, the same memory amount (just dimm are 100 Mhz instead of 133
Mhz), and same kernel configuration just using respectivelly k6 and PIII
optimizzations. Results are the same.

I know i should make some comparative test beetwen 2.4.7 and 2.4.9 using
another scsi card (like a symbios or busloginc) or with some EIDE and ATA
disks, but actually i do not have a server available for those tests with
different HW. SO i made my tests also on a SUN ULTRA5, with one ultrasparc
processor running at 400 Mhz, and 512 MByte of RAM. The ultra5 disk is
simply an ATA66, but it runs as a standard EIDE at 33 Mhz. I could just
test ext2, because i have never been able to run an mkreiserFS on
this platform. DISK I/O is slower with 2.4.9 also with ultrasparc
processor, but I have to admitt that the difference is not so niticeable,
49 minutes to compile the kernel in front of 43...

I read many posts about 2.4.8 slowdown as NFS server, and i think this
could be a case of what i noticed.

Hope this helps
Luigi



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: disk I/O slower with kernel 2.4.9
  2001-08-18 23:23 disk I/O slower with kernel 2.4.9 Luigi Genoni
@ 2001-08-19  0:40 ` Rik van Riel
  2001-08-19  1:19   ` Luigi Genoni
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Rik van Riel @ 2001-08-19  0:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luigi Genoni; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Sun, 19 Aug 2001, Luigi Genoni wrote:

> just making time make -j 2 bzImage with kernel source 2.4.9
> gives me:
>
> real    3m36.041s
> user    2m2.950s
> sys     0m9.740s
>
> while compiling the same sources running kernel 2.4.7 gives:
>
> real    2m28.350s
> user    1m56.150s
> sys     0m5.262s

How does 2.4.8-ac7 do ?

Rik
--
IA64: a worthy successor to i860.

http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/

Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: disk I/O slower with kernel 2.4.9
  2001-08-19  1:19   ` Luigi Genoni
@ 2001-08-19  1:06     ` Steven Cole
  2001-08-19 17:10       ` Luigi Genoni
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Steven Cole @ 2001-08-19  1:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luigi Genoni, Rik van Riel; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Saturday 18 August 2001 09:19 pm, Luigi Genoni wrote:
> I still have to try it, tomorrow i will post the results....
>
> On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Sun, 19 Aug 2001, Luigi Genoni wrote:
> > > just making time make -j 2 bzImage with kernel source 2.4.9
> > > gives me:
> > >
> > > real    3m36.041s
> > > user    2m2.950s
> > > sys     0m9.740s
> > >
> > > while compiling the same sources running kernel 2.4.7 gives:
> > >
> > > real    2m28.350s
> > > user    1m56.150s
> > > sys     0m5.262s
> >
> > How does 2.4.8-ac7 do ?
> >
> > Rik

Rik, Luigi:

Excuse me for jumping in, but here are a few more data points,
using a slower system. I built 2.4.8-ac7 with the following kernels, using:

time make -j2 'MAKE = make -j2' bzImage

to produce the output. Yes, I know this is overkill for an UP system.
This version of time is GNU time 1.7.  Each kernel build was performed
right after the boot and login, running KDE 2.2 and an xterm.

The system is UP, PIII 450, 384 MB, ATA-33, /usr/src mounted ReiserFS
on a WDC WD102AA, the rest of the system ReiserFS on a WDC WD136AA.

2.4.7
681.66user 80.16system 13:32.51elapsed 93%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 
0maxresident)k

2.4.8
682.90user 83.25system 13:29.98elapsed 94%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 
0maxresident)k

2.4.9
684.77user 80.55system 13:32.35elapsed 94%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 
0maxresident)k

2.4.8-ac7
683.99user 80.54system 13:21.91elapsed 95%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 
0maxresident)k

Steven

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: disk I/O slower with kernel 2.4.9
  2001-08-19  0:40 ` Rik van Riel
@ 2001-08-19  1:19   ` Luigi Genoni
  2001-08-19  1:06     ` Steven Cole
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Luigi Genoni @ 2001-08-19  1:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rik van Riel; +Cc: linux-kernel

I still have to try it, tomorrow i will post the results....


On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Aug 2001, Luigi Genoni wrote:
>
> > just making time make -j 2 bzImage with kernel source 2.4.9
> > gives me:
> >
> > real    3m36.041s
> > user    2m2.950s
> > sys     0m9.740s
> >
> > while compiling the same sources running kernel 2.4.7 gives:
> >
> > real    2m28.350s
> > user    1m56.150s
> > sys     0m5.262s
>
> How does 2.4.8-ac7 do ?
>
> Rik
> --
> IA64: a worthy successor to i860.
>
> http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/
>
> Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: disk I/O slower with kernel 2.4.9
  2001-08-19  1:06     ` Steven Cole
@ 2001-08-19 17:10       ` Luigi Genoni
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Luigi Genoni @ 2001-08-19 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rik van Riel, Steven Cole; +Cc: linux-kernel


I did some test with 2.4.8-ac7 and 2.4.9aa3

make -j 2 bzImage on the athlon 1300 mhz with adaptec 2940 and scsi 3 UW
disks.

2.4.8-ac7
real    3m16.738s
user    1m57.980s
sys     0m8.880s

2.4.9-aa3
real    3m26.948s
user    1m58.180s
sys     0m8.810s

Those compilation have been done on the same sources as before with the
same configuration on the reiserFS partition, but with ext2 results are
quite similar (that is not a simple reiserFS slowdown).

Both are better than vanilla 2.4.9 kernel, but I/O is anyway mutch slower
than with 2.4.7.


I saw that there are big changes in beetwen, VM, updated aic7xxx driver,
reiserFS...

I just made another test starting early this morning.

full kde 2.2 building from source (i prepared a script that untars,
executes configure script with --disable-debug and CXXFLAGS="-O -s", makes
installs, runs ldconfig for every kde package).

with 2.4.7 kernel on the athlon this asked 7 hours and a half,

on another Athlon identical to the first one, i am still waiting to end,
and 10 hours have gone.

On the other side i used 2.4.8-ac8 for a while with kde 2.2 as a desktop,
and i have to admitt that VM is better than with 2.4.9. Expecially memory
gets freed the right time!!!!
And that is very important, but this I/O slowdown really has a big impact
on all my servers. Infact the applications I run do not require
big amount of memory, and all servers are dedicated, (one web server, one
mysql and so on).
On this point of view with 2.4.7 my servers simply are
running better.


bests
Luigi

 On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Steven Cole wrote:

> On Saturday 18 August 2001 09:19 pm, Luigi Genoni wrote:
> > I still have to try it, tomorrow i will post the results....
> >
> > On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > On Sun, 19 Aug 2001, Luigi Genoni wrote:
> > > > just making time make -j 2 bzImage with kernel source 2.4.9
> > > > gives me:
> > > >
> > > > real    3m36.041s
> > > > user    2m2.950s
> > > > sys     0m9.740s
> > > >
> > > > while compiling the same sources running kernel 2.4.7 gives:
> > > >
> > > > real    2m28.350s
> > > > user    1m56.150s
> > > > sys     0m5.262s
> > >
> > > How does 2.4.8-ac7 do ?
> > >
> > > Rik
>
> Rik, Luigi:
>
> Excuse me for jumping in, but here are a few more data points,
> using a slower system. I built 2.4.8-ac7 with the following kernels, using:
>
> time make -j2 'MAKE = make -j2' bzImage
>
> to produce the output. Yes, I know this is overkill for an UP system.
> This version of time is GNU time 1.7.  Each kernel build was performed
> right after the boot and login, running KDE 2.2 and an xterm.
>
> The system is UP, PIII 450, 384 MB, ATA-33, /usr/src mounted ReiserFS
> on a WDC WD102AA, the rest of the system ReiserFS on a WDC WD136AA.
>
> 2.4.7
> 681.66user 80.16system 13:32.51elapsed 93%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
> 0maxresident)k
>
> 2.4.8
> 682.90user 83.25system 13:29.98elapsed 94%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
> 0maxresident)k
>
> 2.4.9
> 684.77user 80.55system 13:32.35elapsed 94%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
> 0maxresident)k
>
> 2.4.8-ac7
> 683.99user 80.54system 13:21.91elapsed 95%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
> 0maxresident)k
>
> Steven
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2001-08-19 17:10 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-08-18 23:23 disk I/O slower with kernel 2.4.9 Luigi Genoni
2001-08-19  0:40 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-19  1:19   ` Luigi Genoni
2001-08-19  1:06     ` Steven Cole
2001-08-19 17:10       ` Luigi Genoni

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).