lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Poor performance during disk writes


    On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Andre Hedrick wrote:

    > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Gérard Roudier wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >
    > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Andre Hedrick wrote:
    > >
    > > > File './Bonnie.2276', size: 1073741824, volumes: 1
    > > > Writing with putc()... done: 72692 kB/s 83.7 %CPU
    > > > Rewriting... done: 25355 kB/s 12.0 %CPU
    > > > Writing intelligently...done: 103022 kB/s 40.5 %CPU
    > > > Reading with getc()... done: 37188 kB/s 67.5 %CPU
    > > > Reading intelligently...done: 40809 kB/s 11.4 %CPU
    > > > Seeker 2...Seeker 1...Seeker 3...start 'em...done...done...done...
    > > > ---Sequential Output (nosync)--- ---Sequential Input-- --Rnd Seek-
    > > > -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --04k (03)-
    > > > Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU
    > > > 1*1024 72692 83.7 103022 40.5 25355 12.0 37188 67.5 40809 11.4 382.1 2.4
    > > >
    > > > Maybe this is the kind of performance you want out your ATA subsystem.
    > > > Maybe if I could get a patch in to the kernels we could all have stable
    > > > and fast IO.
    > >
    > > I rather see lots of wasting rather than performance, here. Bonnie says
    > > that your subsystem can sustain 103 MB/s write but only 41 MB/s read. This
    > > looks about 60% throughput wasted for read.
    > >
    > > Note that if you intend to use it only for write-only applications,
    > > performance are not that bad, even if just dropping the data on the floor
    > > would give you infinite throughput without any difference in
    > > functionnality. :-)
    >
    > Well sense somebody paid/paying me make write performance go through the
    > roof -- that is what I did. Now if you look closely you could see that in
    > writing we are doing a boat load more work than reading. If somebody want
    > me to throttle the reads more then they know how to get it done.

    I am not the one that will pay you for that, as you can guess. :-)

    I just was curious about the technical reasons, if any, of so large a
    difference. Just, the CPU and the memory subsystem are certainly not the
    issue. But I donnot want to prevent you from earning from such kind of
    improvement. Hence, let me go back to free scsi.

    Gérard.

    > Regards,
    >
    > Andre Hedrick
    > Linux Disk Certification Project Linux ATA Development

    -
    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 13:14    [W:0.035 / U:0.632 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site