Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 14:35:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 14:35:31 -0400 Received: from 2-210.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.193.160.210]:53683 "EHLO 2-210.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 14:35:30 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 15:39:34 -0300 (BRT) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: Badari Pulavarty cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, , Gerrit Huizenga , Hans-J Tannenberger , Janet Morgan , Mike Anderson , Martin Bligh Subject: Re: 2.5.32 IO performance issues In-Reply-To: <200208291820.g7TIKHA19433@eng2.beaverton.ibm.com> Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 869 Lines: 32 On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Badari Pulavarty wrote: > I am having severe IO performance problems with 2.5.32 (2.5.31 works fine). > I was wondering what caused this. > > As you can see, IO rate went from > > 384MB/sec with 6% CPU utilization on 2.5.31 > to > 120MB/sec with 19% CPU utilization on 2.5.32 > > Any idea ? 384 MB/s is suspiciously fast. What kind of disk subsystem do you have to achieve that speed ? Or did 2.5.31 keep the dirty data in memory, instead of writing it to disk ? ;) regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - 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/