linux-kernel - Re: Linux disk performance.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <45929658.3030507@cfl.rr.com>
Date:	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 10:50:48 -0500
From:	Phillip Susi <psusi@....rr.com>
To:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
CC:	Manish Regmi <regmi.manish@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernelnewbies@...linux.org
Subject: Re: Linux disk performance.

Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Quite honestly, the main place I have found O_DIRECT useful is in 
> keeping programs doing large i/o quantities from blowing the buffers and 
> making the other applications run like crap. If you application is 
> running alone, unless you are very short of CPU or memory avoiding the 
> copy to an o/s buffer will be down in the measurement noise.
> 
> I had a news (usenet) server which normally did 120 art/sec (~480 tps), 
> which dropped to about 50 tps when doing large file copies even at low 
> priority. By using O_DIRECT the impact essentially vanished, at the cost 
> of the copy running about 10-15% slower. Changing various programs to 
> use O_DIRECT only helped when really large blocks of data were involved, 
> and only when i/o clould be done in a way to satisfy the alignment and 
> size requirements of O_DIRECT.
> 
> If you upgrade to a newer kernel you can try other i/o scheduler 
> options, default cfq or even deadline might be helpful.

I would point out that if you are looking for optimal throughput and 
reduced cpu overhead, and avoid blowing out the kernel fs cache, you 
need to couple aio with O_DIRECT.  By itself O_DIRECT will lower 
throughput because there will be brief pauses between each IO while the 
application prepares the next buffer.  You can overcome this by posting 
a few pending buffers concurrently with aio, allowing the kernel to 
always have a buffer ready for the next io as soon as the previous one 
completes.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/