Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 24 Jan 2003 15:03:40 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: 2.5.59mm5 database 'benchmark' results |
| |
David Mansfield <david@cobite.com> wrote: > > > Hi Nick, Andrew, lists, > > I've been testing some recent kernels to see how they compare with a > particular database workload. The workload is actually part of our > production process (last months run) but on a test server. I'll describe > the platform and the workload, but first, the results :-) > > kernel minutes comment > ------------- ----------- --------------------------------- > 2.4.20-aa1 134 i consider this 'baseline' > 2.5.59 124 woo-hoo > 2.4.18-19.7.xsmp 128 not bad for frankenstein's montster > 2.5.59-mm5 157 uh-oh > > Platform: > HP LH3000 U3. Dual 866 Mhz Intel Pentium III, 2GB ram. megaraid > controller with two channels, each channel raid 5 PV on 6 15k scsi disks, > one megaraid LV per PV. > > Two plain disks w/pairs of partitions in raid 1 for OS (redhat 7.3), a > second pair for Oracle redo-log (in a log 'group'). > > Oracle version 8.1.7 (no aio support in this release) is accessing > datafiles on the two megaraid devices via /dev/raw stacked on top of > device-mapper
Rather impressed that you got all that to work ;)
It does appear that the IO scheduler change is not playing nicely with software RAID.
> I'll test any kernel you throw my way.
Thanks. Could you please try 2.5.59-mm5, with
http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/2.5/2.5.59/2.5.59-mm5/broken-out/anticipatory_io_scheduling-2_5_59-mm3.patch
reverted?
- 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/
|  |