Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Jan 2015 13:58:34 -0700 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: [LKP] [block] 34b48db66e0: +3291.6% iostat.sde.wrqm/s |
| |
On 01/22/2015 01:49 PM, Jeff Moyer wrote: > Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> writes: > >>> Agreed on all above, but are the actual benchmark numbers included >>> somewhere in all this mess? I'd like to see if the benchmark numbers >>> improved first, before digging into the guts of which functions are >>> called more or which stats changed. >> >> I deleted the original email, but the latter tables had drive throughput >> rates and it looked higher for the ones I checked on the newer kernel. >> Which the above math would indicate as well, multiplying reqs-per-sec >> and req-size. > > Looking back at the original[1], I think I see the throughput numbers for > iozone. The part that confused me was that each table mixes different > types of data. I'd much prefer if different data were put in different > tables, along with column headers that stated what was being reported > and the units for the measurements. > > Anyway, I find the increased service time troubling, especially this > one: > > testbox/testcase/testparams: ivb44/fsmark/performance-1x-1t-1HDD-xfs-4M-60G-NoSync > > 544 ? 0% +1268.9% 7460 ? 0% iostat.sda.w_await > 544 ? 0% +1268.5% 7457 ? 0% iostat.sda.await > > I'll add this to my queue of things to look into.
From that same table:
1009 ± 0% +1255.7% 13682 ± 0% iostat.sda.avgrq-sz
the average request size has gone up equally. This is clearly a streamed oriented benchmark, if the IOs get that big.
-- Jens Axboe
| |