Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:20:12 +0100
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: jens.axboe@oracle.com
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
       Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Subject: Performance regression in IO scheduler still there
Message-ID: <20091026172012.GC7233@duck.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 931
Lines: 25

  Hi,

  I took time and remeasured tiobench results on recent kernel. A short
conclusion is that there is still a performance regression which I reported
few months ago. The machine is Intel 2 CPU with 2 GB RAM and plain SATA
drive. tiobench sequential write performance numbers with 16 threads:
2.6.29:              AVG       STDERR
37.80 38.54 39.48 -> 38.606667 0.687475

2.6.32-rc5:
37.36 36.41 36.61 -> 36.793333 0.408928 

So about 5% regression. The regression happened sometime between 2.6.29 and
2.6.30 and stays the same since then... With deadline scheduler, there's
no regression. Shouldn't we do something about it?

								Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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/