Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:59:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:59:19 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:60680 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:59:09 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:58:58 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Kurt Garloff , Linux kernel list Subject: Re: read perf improved by mounting ext2? Message-ID: <20010424105858.C9357@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20010424013150.A6892@garloff.etpnet.phys.tue.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010424013150.A6892@garloff.etpnet.phys.tue.nl>; from kurt@garloff.de on Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:31:50AM +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 24 2001, Kurt Garloff wrote: > I get it. But not over the whole disk. > Doing a read speed measurement on /dev/hda, I constantly get ~16 MB/s. > Not bad, but less than I'd expect. Measuring single partitions, some show > the same, some show significantly more, 26MB/s--18MB/s, depending on the > position of the partition on disk. Those look good! > > There are enough partitions to see a clear pattern: Those with mounted ext2 > filesystems perform better. Umounting them does not harm, they just need to > have been mounted once. reiser or (v)fat however don't improve anything. > swap does, as does a ext2 over raid5. You wouldn't happen to have 4kB ext2 filesystems on those? When ext2 mounts, it sets the soft blocksize to that then, I would expect this to give at least some benefit over using 1kB blocks (as your IDE partition otherwise would have). -- Jens Axboe - 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/