![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Jeremy Higdon wrote: >On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 05:36:18PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > >> >>Jeremy Higdon wrote: >> >> >>>My tests were on an 8 CPU x 1300 MHz Altix with 64 disks. >>> >>> >>> >>Nice - so if you had enough IO capacity to saturate the CPUs it >>might come close to a 4x improvement - and this sounds like one >>of your baby systems? >> > >Baby by cpu count, mid size by I/O capability. Extrapolations of >this sort are fraught with peril. However, it is conceivable that >we would end up with 4X the IOPS. > > Well, it is more than 2x! What does a profile look like after the patch, I wonder? >>I wonder why nobody's complained about this before? >> > >Well, some of us have, but probably not very loudly. I had >naively believed that the global unplug was gone in 2.6. > > I wasn't talking about SGI in particular, I just remember people being very worried about making sure we can support *thousands* of queues quite a while back. Anyway, it's done now. And Jens' patch turned out to be pretty simple and probably makes the code cleaner, anyway. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:01 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||