xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Page cache write performance issue

To: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Page cache write performance issue
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:16:59 +1000
Cc: piggin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20041013202041.2e7066af.akpm@osdl.org>
References: <20041013054452.GB1618@frodo> <20041012231945.2aff9a00.akpm@osdl.org> <20041013063955.GA2079@frodo> <20041013000206.680132ad.akpm@osdl.org> <20041013172352.B4917536@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> <416CE423.3000607@cyberone.com.au> <20041013013941.49693816.akpm@osdl.org> <20041014005300.GA716@frodo> <20041013202041.2e7066af.akpm@osdl.org>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.3i
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 08:20:41PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >  I just tried switching CONFIG_HIGHMEM off, and so running the
> >  machine with 512MB; then adjusted the test to write 256M into
> >  the page cache, again in 1K sequential chunks.  A similar mis-
> >  behaviour happens, though the numbers are slightly better (up
> >  from ~4 to ~6.5MB/sec).  Both ext2 and xfs see this.  When I
> >  drop the file size down to 128M with this kernel, I see good
> >  results again (as we'd expect).
> 
> No such problem here, with
> 
>       dd if=/dev/zero of=x bs=1k count=128k
> 
> on a 256MB machine.  xfs and ext2.

Yup, rebooted with mem=128M and on my box, & that crawls.
Maybe its just this old hunk 'o junk, I suppose; odd that
2.6.8 was OK with this though.

> Can you exhibit this one more than one machine?

I haven't got a second ia32 box atm - setting one up soon,
will let you know how it goes.

> Silly question: what does `grep sync' /etc/fstab say over there? ;)

Same thing it said on 2.6.8. :)  Nada.

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>