Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932334AbWBXQSa (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:18:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932335AbWBXQSa (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:18:30 -0500 Received: from rs27.luxsci.com ([66.216.127.24]:22763 "EHLO rs27.luxsci.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932334AbWBXQS3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:18:29 -0500 Message-ID: <43FF31E4.2000705@eventmonitor.com> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:18:44 -0500 From: Bryan Fink User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: Trond Myklebust , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: NFS Still broken in 2.6.x? References: <43FE1CAD.3050806@eventmonitor.com> <1140734824.7963.38.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20060224041435.733b4f0d.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060224041435.733b4f0d.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1929 Lines: 47 Andrew Morton wrote: >Trond Myklebust wrote: > > >>On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 15:35 -0500, Bryan Fink wrote: >> > Hi All. I'm running into a bit of trouble with NFS on 2.6. I see that >> > at least Trond thought, mid-January, that "The readahead algorithm has >> > been broken in 2.6.x for at least the past 6 months." ( >> > http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0601.2/0559.html) Anyone >> > know if that has been fixed? >> >> No it hasn't been fixed. ...and no, this is not a problem that only >> affects NFS: it just happens to give a more noticeable performance >> impact due to the larger latency of NFS over a 100Mbps link. >> >> > >iirc, last time we went round this loop Ram and I were unable to reproduce it. > >Does anyone have a testcase? > > Hi again. I just found some new, very interesting information. Until just a few minutes ago, I hadn't realized that one could change the I/O scheduler at runtime. Looking into it, my system was using "cfq", and I have three other options, "noop", "anticipatory", and "deadline". I've now run tests using all three of the other schedulers, and they all bring performance back up to the level I had with kernel 2.4. So, either NFS is incompatible with cfq, or cfq has some issues that show very vividly when used with NFS (or, I suppose, I just have my system tuned wrong for use with cfq). Hope this helps the bug hunt. Special thanks to Asfand Yar Qazi for writing to the list this morning asking how to change schedulers at runtime (http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0602.3/0135.html). Off to find out exactly what the best scheduler is for my needs. -Bryan - 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/