| To: | Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Question: why does dbench take so much longer to run on XFSthen ext2 file system |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 17 Jan 2002 18:26:57 +0100 |
| Cc: | Philip Chiang <pchiang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1011284870.13548.632.camel@jen.americas.sgi.com> |
| References: | <006001c19ee0$aa218170$1701a8c0@win2kserver.win2kdomain.com> <1011222311.3602.10.camel@stout.americas.sgi.com> <000801c19ee4$d012ce30$1701a8c0@win2kserver.win2kdomain.com> <1011284870.13548.632.camel@jen.americas.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.3.22.1i |
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:27:50AM -0600, Steve Lord wrote: > My leaning is towards a problem with your build of xfs, or the parameters > used. You did not by any chance turn on the debug parameters in xfs did > you? Having a CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG=y in your .config options will turn xfs into > a dog with 2400 ASSERTS and a lot of other checking addded to the filesystem. Assuming XFS is compiled in, not built as a module, just booting with profile=2, running the test and then afterwards running /usr/sbin/readprofile with the right System.map should show very quickly where the CPU is wasted. (the simple profiler unfortunately cannot deal with modules) -Andi |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Question: why does dbench take so much longer to run on XFSthen ext2 file system, Steve Lord |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: problem with VMware -XFS guilty one - was: Re: XFS is innocent, Olaf Frączyk |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Question: why does dbench take so much longer to run on XFSthen ext2 file system, Steve Lord |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Question: why does dbench take so much longer to run on XFS then ext2 file system, Stephen Lord |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |