Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:24:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:23:55 -0500 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.22]:26542 "EHLO hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:23:39 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:26:09 -0500 To: Jens Axboe Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: I/O tests using elvtune to improve interactive performance Message-ID: <20011119102609.A3713@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <138.49c8e42.29247804@aol.com> <20011117030611.A214@earthlink.net> <20011119080922.S11826@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20011119080922.S11826@suse.de>; from axboe@suse.de on Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 08:09:22AM +0100 From: rwhron@earthlink.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 08:09:22AM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Test: Run growfiles tests from Linux Test Project that really hurt > > interactive performance. Simultaneously run "ls -laR /". > > Change the elevator read latency value with elvtune. > > Also run mp3blaster tests. > > Interesting tests, thanks. I wonder if you could be convinced to do > bonnie++ and dbench tests with the same read_latency values used? Also, > I'm assuming you kept write latency at its default of 16384? > -- > Jens Axboe > Thanks for the feedback. Write latency was 16384 for all tests. I'm downloading dbench and bonnie++ now. I'll check them out. I'm still not sure how to measure/quantify interactive performance. My ideal test will have these components: 1) Simulate and measure user interactive response time. 2) Disk I/O patterns capable of making interactive performance slow. 3) Measurement of I/O throughput. 4) Note how changes with elvtune effect throughput and response time. 5) It's not too boring. (i.e. type something, use a stop watch). It's the "measure interactive response time" that I haven't got a handle on yet. I'm looking at the SSBA benchmarks for something that simulates users. I don't know if it measures response time. I could resort to a stopwatch to test interactive response, but hopefully, something better will come to mind. -- Randy Hron - 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/