lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux disk performance.
On 12/18/06, Erik Mouw <mouw@nl.linux.org> wrote:
<...snip...>
> >
> > But isn't O_DIRECT supposed to bypass buffering in Kernel?
>
> It is.
>
> > Doesn't it directly write to disk?
>
> Yes, but it still uses an IO scheduler.
>

Ok. but i also tried with noop to turnoff disk scheduling effects.
There was still timing differences. Usually i get 3100 microseconds
but upto 20000 microseconds at certain intervals. I am just using
gettimeofday between two writes to read the timing.


> In your first message you mentioned you were using an ancient 2.6.10
> kernel. That kernel uses the anticipatory IO scheduler. Update to the
> latest stable kernel (2.6.19.1 at time of writing) and it will default
> to the CFQ scheduler which has a smoother writeout, plus you can give
> your process a different IO scheduling class and level (see
> Documentation/block/ioprio.txt).

Thanks... i will try with CFQ.



Nick Piggin:
> but
> they look like they might be a (HZ quantised) delay coming from
> block layer plugging.

Sorry i didn´t understand what you mean.

To minimise scheduling effects i tried giving it maximum priority.


--
---------------------------------------------------------------
regards
Manish Regmi
---------------------------------------------------------------
UNIX without a C Compiler is like eating Spaghetti with your mouth
sewn shut. It just doesn't make sense.
-
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: 2006-12-19 07:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site