Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 20:22:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 20:22:30 -0400 Received: from roc-24-93-20-125.rochester.rr.com ([24.93.20.125]:19963 "EHLO www.kroptech.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 20:22:27 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 20:26:03 -0400 From: Adam Kropelin To: Andrew Morton Cc: lkml , riel@conectiva.com.br Subject: Re: [patch 1/21] random fixes Message-ID: <20020813002603.GA20817@www.kroptech.com> References: <3D56146B.C3CAB5E1@zip.com.au> <20020811142938.GA681@www.kroptech.com> <3D56A83E.ECF747C6@zip.com.au> <20020812002739.GA778@www.kroptech.com> <3D57406E.D39E9B89@zip.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D57406E.D39E9B89@zip.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2689 Lines: 67 On Sun, Aug 11, 2002 at 09:58:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > ext3 performs its own writeback alongside the core kernel's writeback > decisions, so that complicates things. I ran the test after mounting the partition as ext2 and saw a slight decrease in performance (7-10 seconds over the duration of the test), but I did not have time to run more than once so this could be a fluke. In general, the `vmstat 1` output looked the same to me. > > Results (average of 4 runs): > > > > 2.5.31-akpm: 2m 43s > > 2.5.31: 2m 33s > > 2.4.19: 2m 18s > > yes. For this workload (10 mbyte/sec ftp transfer onto a >20 meg/sec > disk) the application should never block on IO - all writeback should > happen via pdflush. > You can make 2.5 use the 2.4 settings with > > cd /proc/sys/vm > echo 30 > dirty_background_ratio > echo 60 > dirty_async_ratio > echo 70 > dirty_sync_ratio These settings bring -akpm in line with stock 2.5.31, but they are both still slower than 2.4.19 (which itself could do better, I think). > and I expect you'll find that fixes it up. Setting dirty_background_ratio > to 10% will make it even better. But it will hurt dbench numbers at No real change at 10%. It's consistently a second or two faster than -akpm is at 30%, but not a drastic change. > certain client counts, which is a national emergency. > > Sigh. I don't know what the right numbers are. There aren't any; that's > the problem with magic numbers. That part of the kernel is making writeback > and throttling decisions in total ignorance of the overall state of > the system. It certainly seems something is amiss. If we could actually manage to keep the disk busy (and this is a fairly slow disk), we'd do wonderfully. But with a 2-3 second pause every 4-5 seconds, we're transferring data barely 50% of the time. (Yes, the pause is long enough the disk activity LED actually goes out.) The short-term average transfer rate over the FTP connection is very respectable for older hardware: 7-8 MB/s. But with the stalls, the overall throughput is just over 4 MB/s. > In fact, I'd be inclined to set the background ratio much lower than > 2.4, and to hell with dbench. Because the lower level is better for > real programs, as you've observed. > Care to tune and retest? Absolutely. I'll try whatever ideas/patches you want to throw at me. BTW, full `vmstat 1` logs are available for all these tests if you want them. --Adam - 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/