| To: | David Sparks <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Extreme slowness with xfs [WAS: Re: Slowness with new pc] |
| From: | Stian Jordet <liste@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:31:08 +0100 |
| Cc: | "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <492C75E2.1080701@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1226760254.5089.11.camel@chevrolet> <430c4fa50811180551r67d5d680tf1ffa493604ac4ea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1227476908.32357.5.camel@chevrolet> <alpine.DEB.1.10.0811231721350.22594@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1227485956.5145.10.camel@chevrolet> <alpine.DEB.1.10.0811240448570.25866@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1227569808.5039.6.camel@chevrolet> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0811250057510.27010@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1227645887.7992.10.camel@chevrolet> <492C6C9B.3060000@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1227649893.6557.10.camel@oldsmobile> <492C75E2.1080701@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
ti., 25.11.2008 kl. 14.02 -0800, skrev David Sparks: > > With no barriers, it's 22s faster than my workstation. That can't be the > > way it's supposed to be? > > What IO elevator are you using? Did you try the 'noop' or 'deadline' > schedulers? > > cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler > echo noop > /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler That improved the time 10s (noop and deadline both finished at 46s, while cfq (still) uses 59... Still slower than my laptop... (ok, I do understand that this is a very static benchmark, that really doesn't say anything about real life performance. But "everyone" unpacks the kernel faster than I, on a brand new system worth $3500USD... Thanks :) -Stian |
| Previous by Date: | Re: truncated files, Dave Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Badness in key lookup (length), Barry Naujok |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Extreme slowness with xfs [WAS: Re: Slowness with new pc], David Sparks |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Extreme slowness with xfs [WAS: Re: Slowness with new pc], Eric Sandeen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |