[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070321074014.GD14389@kernel.dk>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 08:40:14 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: AIO, FIO and Threads ...
On Tue, Mar 20 2007, Davide Libenzi wrote:
>
> I was looking at Jens FIO stuff, and I decided to cook a quick patch for
> FIO to support GUASI (Generic Userspace Asyncronous Syscall Interface):
>
> http://www.xmailserver.org/guasi-lib.html
>
> I then ran a few tests on my Dual Opteron 252 with SATA drives (sata_nv)
> and 8GB of RAM.
> Mind that I'm not FIO expert, like at all, but I got some interesting
> results when comparing GUASI with libaio at 8/1000/10000 depths.
> If I read those result correctly (Jens may help), GUASI output is more
> then double the libaio one.
> Lots of context switches, yes. But the throughput looks like 2+ times.
> Can someone try to repeat the measures and/or spot the error?
> Or tell me which other tests to run?
> This is kinda a suprise for me ...
I don't know guasi at all, but libaio requires O_DIRECT to be async. I'm
sure you know this, but you may not know that fio default to buffered IO
so you have to tell it to use O_DIRECT :-)
So try adding a --direct=1 (or --buffered=0, same thing) as an extra
option when comparing depths > 1.
I'll add your guasi engine, but disable it. Unfortunately fio still
doesn't have a nifty configure setup, so these things are still
manual...
--
Jens Axboe
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists