| To: | Austin Gonyou <austin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Read performance issues with 2.6.0test5? |
| From: | Greg Freemyer <freemyer-ml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 22 Sep 2003 14:03:38 -0400 |
| Cc: | Frank Hellmann <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <1064248640.1949.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> |
| Organization: | |
| References: | <3F6EFF6E.9040005@opticalart.de> <1064248640.1949.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> |
| Reply-to: | freemyer-ml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 12:37, Austin Gonyou wrote: > I agree that these results are odd. Something is amiss here, but there > really are many parts to remove before signifying one or the other. You > could always format that MD volume you made as EXT3 or Reiser and > perform the same test. > If the filesystem is of no value, you could also do you dd to the raw MD volume. If that has similar problems then you can forget about xfs as the bottleneck. Greg -- Greg Freemyer |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: CVS-2.4.22: File system is too large to be mounted on this system, Steve Lord |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: CVS-2.4.22: File system is too large to be mounted on this system (fixed), Tru Huynh |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Read performance issues with 2.6.0test5?, Austin Gonyou |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Read performance issues with 2.6.0test5?, Frank Hellmann |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |