Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 01:28:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 01:28:30 -0500 Received: from packet.digeo.com ([12.110.80.53]:641 "EHLO packet.digeo.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 01:28:27 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:38:58 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: rwhron@earthlink.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: IO scheduler benchmarking Message-Id: <20030224223858.52c61880.akpm@digeo.com> In-Reply-To: <20030225053547.GA1571@rushmore> References: <20030225053547.GA1571@rushmore> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.9 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Feb 2003 06:38:35.0872 (UTC) FILETIME=[85DBF600:01C2DC98] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1942 Lines: 58 rwhron@earthlink.net wrote: > > Executive question: Why does 2.5.62-mm2 have higher sequential > write latency than 2.5.61-mm1? Well bear in mind that we sometimes need to perform reads to be able to perform writes. So the way tiobench measures it, you could be seeing read-vs-write latencies here. And there are various odd interactions in, at least, ext3. You did not specify which filesystem was used. > ... > Thr MB/sec CPU% avg lat max latency > 2.5.62-mm2-as 8 14.76 52.04% 6.14 4.5 > 2.5.62-mm2-dline 8 9.91 13.90% 9.41 .8 > 2.5.62-mm2 8 9.83 15.62% 7.38 408.9 Fishiness. 2.5.62-mm2 _is_ 2.5.62-mm2-as. Why the 100x difference? That 408 seconds looks suspect. I don't know what tiobench is doing in there, really. I find it more useful to test simple things, which I can understand. If you want to test write latency, do this: while true do write-and-fsync -m 200 -O -f foo done Maybe run a few of these. This command will cause a continuous streaming file overwrite. then do: time write-and-fsync -m1 -f foo this will simply write a megabyte file, fsync it and exit. You need to be careful with this - get it wrong and most of the runtime is actually paging the executables back in. That is why the above background load is just reusing the same pagecache over and over. The latency which I see for the one megabyte write and fsync varies a lot. >From one second to ten. That's with the deadline scheduler. There is a place in VFS where one writing task could accidentally hammer a different one. I cannot trigger that, but I'll fix it up in next -mm. - 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/