[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <x49tz3ia45h.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:15:22 -0400
From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@...i.umich.edu>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Jim Rees <rees@...ch.edu>, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.30-rc deadline scheduler performance regression for iozone over NFS
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no> writes:
> On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 15:11 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 11:00 -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> > Sorry for the previous, stupid question. I applied the patch in
>> > addition the last one and here are the results:
>> >
>> > 70327
>> > 71561
>> > 68760
>> > 69199
>> > 65324
>> >
>> > A packet capture for this run is available here:
>> > http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer/trond2.pcap.bz2
>> >
>> > Any more ideas? ;)
>>
>> Yep. I've got 2 more patches for you. With both of them applied, I'm
>> seeing decent performance on my own test rig. The first patch is
>> appended. I'll send the second in another email (to avoid attachments).
>
> Here is number 2. It is incremental to all the others...
With all 4 patches applied, these are the numbers for 5 runs:
103168
101212
103346
100842
103172
It's looking much better, but we're still off by a few percent. Thanks
for the quick turnaround on this, Trond! If you submit these patches,
feel free to add:
Tested-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Cheers,
Jeff
--
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