[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090527113211.6891.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:35:21 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Hisashi Hifumi <hifumi.hisashi@....ntt.co.jp>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"jens.axboe@...cle.com" <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] readahead:add blk_run_backing_dev
> >> >even consumed 9% of a CPU, so where on earth has the kernel gone to?
> >> >
> >> >Have you been able to reproduce this in your testing?
> >>
> >> Yes, this test on my environment is reproducible.
> >
> >Hisashi, does your environment have some special configurations?
>
> Hi.
> My testing environment is as follows:
> Hardware: HP DL580
> CPU:Xeon 3.2GHz *4 HT enabled
> Memory:8GB
> Storage: Dothill SANNet2 FC (7Disks RAID-0 Array)
>
> I did dd to this disk-array and got improved performance number.
>
> I noticed that when a disk is just one HDD, performance improvement
> is very small.
thas's odd.
Why your patch depend on transfer rate difference?
--
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