Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 00:06:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 00:06:25 -0400 Received: from roc-24-93-20-125.rochester.rr.com ([24.93.20.125]:37871 "EHLO www.kroptech.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 00:06:24 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 00:10:11 -0400 From: Adam Kropelin To: Andrew Morton Cc: lkml , riel@conectiva.com.br Subject: Re: [patch 1/21] random fixes Message-ID: <20020813041011.GA12227@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> <20020813002603.GA20817@www.kroptech.com> <3D5857A4.FE358FA2@zip.com.au> <20020813022550.GA6810@www.kroptech.com> <3D587706.A0F2DC21@zip.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D587706.A0F2DC21@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: 5411 Lines: 102 On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 08:03:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Adam Kropelin wrote: > > Actually, I'm running an FTP server on the testbed machine and pushing the > > data from a client on another (much faster) machine. I straced the server > > (redhat wu-ftpd2.6.1-20) and it looks like 8 KB reads/writes. > > > > OK, tried that against a slow disk (13 megs/sec write bandwidth). 2.5.31, > defalt writeback settings. > > ext3 is misbehaving: > and takes 86 seconds. > > When the server is writing to ext2, it is good: > and the transfer takes 54 seconds, which is wirespeed. > > Are you _sure_ it was bad with ext2? Yes. [root@devbox adk0212] mount /dev/hda3 on / type ext2 (rw) none on /proc type proc (rw) /dev/hda1 on /boot type ext2 (rw) none on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620) none on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw) procs memory swap io system cpu r b w swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id 0 1 1 120 4360 0 141132 0 0 0 9804 6775 564 0 45 55 0 1 1 120 4344 0 141132 0 0 0 0 1083 20 0 0 99 0 0 0 120 4364 0 141116 0 0 0 40 2098 156 0 11 89 0 0 0 120 4384 0 141368 0 0 0 4 7013 594 0 52 47 0 0 0 120 4360 0 141416 0 0 0 0 6914 589 1 56 43 0 1 1 120 4464 0 140856 0 0 0 15420 6235 520 0 42 58 0 1 1 120 4456 0 140856 0 0 0 3240 1094 36 0 2 98 1 0 0 120 4428 0 140844 0 0 0 52 1151 70 0 4 96 1 0 0 120 4440 0 141356 0 0 0 4 6810 541 1 42 57 0 0 0 120 4464 0 141320 0 0 0 0 6894 553 1 40 58 0 1 1 120 4396 0 140840 0 0 0 15508 6018 466 0 40 59 0 1 1 120 4388 0 140840 0 0 0 1608 1093 57 0 2 98 0 0 0 120 4404 0 140832 0 0 0 52 2350 165 0 12 87 0 0 0 120 4460 0 141380 0 0 0 4 7040 564 1 42 57 1 0 0 120 4356 0 141372 0 0 0 4 7073 570 1 45 54 0 1 1 120 4360 0 140916 0 0 0 15404 5541 437 1 36 63 0 1 1 120 4356 0 140916 0 0 0 2832 1084 55 0 1 99 0 0 0 120 4356 0 140904 0 0 0 48 1614 125 0 8 91 0 0 1 120 4380 0 141412 0 0 0 4 6888 552 1 43 56 1 0 0 120 4232 0 141476 0 0 4 0 6857 556 1 40 58 0 1 1 120 4352 0 140988 0 0 0 13700 5148 449 0 35 65 Is it possible that the darn thing is mounted ext3 even though fstab and mount agree that it's ext2? > How long does > > dd if=/dev/zero of=foo bs=1M count=600 ; sync > > take against that disk? 1m 23s (I said it was a slow disk ;) Even during that, the writeout was inconsistent (but a lot better than during the FTP transfer): procs memory swap io system cpu r b w swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id 0 1 3 1784 2180 0 141072 0 0 0 5220 1070 19 0 6 93 0 1 2 1784 2248 0 141020 0 0 0 8064 1066 23 0 8 92 1 0 3 1784 2296 0 141008 0 0 0 8436 1132 36 0 12 87 0 1 3 1784 2300 0 141004 0 0 0 6828 1072 164 0 24 75 1 0 2 1784 2988 0 140336 0 0 0 4664 1071 144 0 21 79 1 0 2 1784 2616 0 140700 0 0 0 12944 2688 102 0 5 95 0 1 3 1784 2296 0 141036 0 0 0 10048 1076 125 1 21 78 0 1 1 1784 3284 0 140048 0 0 4 5504 1064 143 0 19 80 0 1 1 1784 3284 0 140048 0 0 0 0 1064 51 0 1 99 0 1 1 1784 3284 0 140048 0 0 0 0 1058 23 0 1 99 1 1 3 1812 2312 0 141236 0 28 0 22892 2495 131 0 10 90 0 2 3 1812 3204 0 140340 0 0 4 7736 1065 81 0 25 75 0 2 3 1812 3204 0 140340 0 0 0 3848 1062 52 0 9 90 0 2 3 1812 3204 0 140340 0 0 0 7696 1059 50 0 2 98 0 1 3 1812 3196 0 140336 0 0 4 3976 1061 58 0 20 80 0 1 3 1812 3312 0 140208 0 0 0 7944 1065 25 0 4 96 0 1 2 1812 3308 0 140208 0 0 0 3844 1065 32 0 1 99 0 1 2 1812 3308 0 140208 0 0 0 2956 1056 43 0 3 97 0 1 2 1812 3268 0 140248 0 0 4 5548 1059 64 0 5 94 0 1 2 1812 3268 0 140252 0 0 0 236 1065 56 0 4 96 0 1 2 1812 3268 0 140252 0 0 0 0 1058 42 0 1 99 (all of the above discussion was 2.5.31 stock with default writeout settings) I've been trying these sorts of tests on this machine for over a year now, with various disk subsystems, and I have *never* seen anything as nice and consistent as the ext2 writeout you quoted. Maybe this machine is cursed. --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/