From: Zlatko Calusic <zlatko@iskon.hr>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: Linux I/O performance in 2.3.99pre
Date: 24 May 2000 11:17:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dnd7mc8fyt.fsf@magla.iskon.hr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Andrea Arcangeli's message of "Mon, 22 May 2000 22:08:11 -0700 (PDT)"
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> writes:
> On 22 May 2000, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
>
> >Question for Andrea: is it possible to get back to the old speeds with
> >tha new elevator code, or is the speed drop unfortunate effect of the
> >"non-starvation" logic, and thus can't be cured?
>
> If you don't mind about I/O scheduling latencies then just use elvtune and
> set read/write latency to a big number (for example 1000000) and set the
> write-bomb logic value to 128. However in misc usage you care about
> responsiveness as well as latency so you probably don't want to disable
> the I/O scheduler completly. The write bomb logic defaul value is too
> strict probably and we may want to enlarge it to 32 or 64 to allow SCSI
> to be more effective.
>
Yes, you are right. I tested performance with different parameters to
elvtune, and it definitely improves rewriting speed if I put bigger
numbers. In fact with 1000000/1000000/128 it is back to 2.3.42 results
(rewriting speed ~9.2MB/s).
While at it, could you explain what are write bomb logic and latency
numbers? What do they define?
> About the bad VM performance of the latest kernels please try again with
> pre9-1 + classzone-28.
>
I did a test with pre8 + classzone28 (didn't have 9-1 at the moment,
but there was only one easily resolvable conflict in vmscan.c). And I
must admit that I'm completely satisfied with its behaviour. System is
definitely working right AND fast. It reads, writes and swaps with
full speed and the system survived all tests I made against it. With
classzone patch applied, VM/IO balance/behaviour seems perfect.
Too bad the patch is not going to make it to the Linus kernel tree,
but hey, there's always a possibility of applying a patch for better
performance. Assuming you continue porting the patch to forthcoming
kernels, of course (that's to say I tried to port it to the pre9-4 and
failed :)).
Regards,
--
Zlatko
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/
prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-05-24 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-05-22 12:26 Zlatko Calusic
2000-05-23 5:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-05-24 9:17 ` Zlatko Calusic [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=dnd7mc8fyt.fsf@magla.iskon.hr \
--to=zlatko@iskon.hr \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox