[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a0272b440908030444g4808ddf4o35eb587b91717cb4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:44:28 +0200
From: Ronald Moesbergen <intercommit@...il.com>
To: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>
Cc: fengguang.wu@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Alan.Brunelle@...com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
jens.axboe@...cle.com, randy.dunlap@...cle.com,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND] [PATCH] readahead:add blk_run_backing_dev
2009/8/3 Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>:
> Ronald Moesbergen, on 08/03/2009 01:15 PM wrote:
>>
>> 2009/7/31 Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>:
>>>
>>> OK, as I expected, on the SCST level everything is clear and the forced
>>> ordering change didn't change anything.
>>>
>>> But still, a single read stream must be the fastest from single thread.
>>> Otherwise, there's something wrong somewhere in the I/O path: block
>>> layer,
>>> RA, I/O scheduler. And, apparently, this is what we have and should find
>>> out
>>> the cause.
>>>
>>> Can you check if noop on the target and/or initiator makes any
>>> difference?
>>> Case 5 with 1 and 2 threads will be sufficient.
>>
>> That doesn't seem to help:
>>
>> client kernel: 2.6.26-15lenny3 (debian)
>> server kernel: 2.6.29.5 with readahead-context, blk_run_backing_dev
>> and io_context, forced_order
>>
>> With one IO thread:
>> 5) client: default, server: default (server noop, client noop)
>> blocksize R R R R(avg, R(std R
>> (bytes) (s) (s) (s) MB/s) ,MB/s) (IOPS)
>> 67108864 17.612 21.113 21.355 51.532 4.680 0.805
>> 33554432 18.329 18.523 19.049 54.969 0.891 1.718
>> 16777216 18.497 18.219 17.042 57.217 2.059 3.576
>>
>> With two threads:
>> 5) client: default, server: default (server noop, client noop)
>> blocksize R R R R(avg, R(std R
>> (bytes) (s) (s) (s) MB/s) ,MB/s) (IOPS)
>> 67108864 17.436 18.376 20.493 54.807 3.634 0.856
>> 33554432 17.466 16.980 18.261 58.337 1.740 1.823
>> 16777216 18.222 17.567 18.077 57.045 0.901 3.565
>
> And with client cfq, server noop?
client kernel: 2.6.26-15lenny3 (debian)
server kernel: 2.6.29.5 with readahead-context, blk_run_backing_dev
and io_context, forced_order
With one IO thread:
5) client: default, server: default (server noop, client cfq)
blocksize R R R R(avg, R(std R
(bytes) (s) (s) (s) MB/s) ,MB/s) (IOPS)
67108864 16.019 16.434 15.730 63.777 1.144 0.997
33554432 16.020 16.624 15.936 63.258 1.183 1.977
16777216 15.966 15.465 16.115 64.630 1.145 4.039
With two threads:
5) client: default, server: default (server noop, client cfq)
blocksize R R R R(avg, R(std R
(bytes) (s) (s) (s) MB/s) ,MB/s) (IOPS)
67108864 16.504 15.762 14.842 65.335 2.848 1.021
33554432 16.080 16.627 15.766 63.406 1.386 1.981
16777216 15.489 16.627 16.043 63.842 1.846 3.990
Ronald.
--
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