linux-kernel - Re: Abysmal disk performance, how to debug?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sat, 20 Jan 2007 21:10:22 +0100 (CET)
From:	Tim Schmielau <tim@...sik3.uni-rostock.de>
To:	Ismail Dönmez <ismail@...dus.org.tr>
cc:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Abysmal disk performance, how to debug?

On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Ismail Dönmez wrote:

> 20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde şunları yazmıştınız:
> [...]
> > > vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
> > >
> > > /dev/hda:
> > >  Timing cached reads:   1576 MB in  2.00 seconds = 788.18 MB/sec
> > >  Timing buffered disk reads:   74 MB in  3.01 seconds =  24.55 MB/sec
> > >
> > >
> > > [~]> time dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/1GB bs=1M count=1024
> > > 1024+0 records in
> > > 1024+0 records out
> > > 1073741824 bytes (1,1 GB) copied, 77,2809 s, 13,9 MB/s
> > >
> > > real    1m17.482s
> > > user    0m0.003s
> > > sys     0m2.350s
> >
> > That's not bad at all ! I suspect that if your system becomes unresponsive,
> > it's because real writes start when the cache is full. And if you fill
> > 512 MB of RAM with data that you then need to flush on disk at 14 MB/s, it
> > can take about 40 seconds during which it might be difficult to do
> > anything.
> >
> > Try lowering the cache flush starting point to about 10 MB if you want
> > (2% of 512 MB) :
> >
> > # echo 2 >/proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio
> > # echo 2 >/proc/sys/vm/dirty_background_ratio
> 
> After that I get,
> 
> [~]>  time dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/1GB bs=1M count=1024
> 1024+0 records in
> 1024+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes (1,1 GB) copied, 41,7005 s, 25,7 MB/s
> 
> real    0m41.926s
> user    0m0.007s
> sys     0m2.500s
> 
> 
> not bad! thanks :)

Note that these dd "benchmarks" are completely bogus, because the data 
doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening 
data, try

  time dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/1GB bs=1M count=1024; time sync

The dd returns as soon as all data could be buffered in RAM. Only sync 
will show how long it takes to actually write out the data to disk.
also explains why you see better results is writeout starts earlier.

Tim