> Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> ok - retried with those options (16384 in my case because 32k was
> too big for my small 700m test partition) and the dbench results
> got back to normal ... how about increasing those numbers by
> default a bit? - would there be any negative side-effects
> from doing so?
It is being looked into for internal sgi reasons too, yes the default
could be larger, it is just a matter of working out the numbers to use.
By the way, you can now use -o logbufs=8 at mount time, but this is
somewhat overkill.
>
> > These should help XFS performance here, I suspect, but have not tried that
> > this will also help:
>
> > echo 5000 > /proc/sys/vm/pagebuf/flush_int
>
> > This will make the interval between dirtying file data and flushing it to
> > disk closer to that used by ext2. One of the issues with dbench is files
> > getting removed shortly after they are created, you can get mush better
> > performance if the removal happens before the data goes out to disk.
>
> will try this too now
This will not really help - I tried it.
Other changes coming down the pipeline - probably next week will help too,
we have better dbench and bonnie numbers on some internal code right now.
Steve
|