lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: Disk performance degradation
Date
Comparative vmstat -d 1 could help as well

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Andrew Morton [mailto:akpm@osdl.org]
Envoyé : mercredi 30 juillet 2003 12:55
À : Stefano Rivoir
Cc : lista1@telia.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Objet : Re: Disk performance degradation


Stefano Rivoir <s.rivoir@gts.it> wrote:
>
> Voluspa wrote:
>
> > On 2003-07-29 12:00:06 Stefano Rivoir wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Is there something I'm missing?!
> >
> >
> > No, you are not ;-) You can reclaim some speed by doing a "hdparm -a
> > 512". See thread for explanation (it's the borked value for readahead):
>
> Thanks for the hint. This seems to make things a little better, but I'm
> still far away from 2.4 performances. I thought that anticipatory sched
> could be part of the problem, and booting with elevator=deadline
> does a little better... but using 2.4 is completely another thing.
> By the way, -a 512 vs -a 8 is a kernel "change" or an hdpam one?

What makes you think it is a disk performance problem at all? All we know
is that KDE applications take longer to start up, yes?

How much memory is in that machine? Can you run a `vmstat 1' trace during
the "slow" operations?

-
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/
-
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 13:47    [W:0.023 / U:31.660 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site