Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:49:35 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [BENCHMARK] I/O regression after 2.6.0-test5 |
| |
Hi Guys, If you have time, would you please try testing as-iosched.c from test5 in a later kernel (it won't go into test8-mm1 though).
Thanks
venom@sns.it wrote:
>me too, on some self made db benchs on both mysql and postgresql, testing, of >course, I/O. > >On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Dave Olien wrote: > > >>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 21:51:23 -0700 >>From: Dave Olien <dmo@osdl.org> >>To: rwhron@earthlink.net >>Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org >>Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] I/O regression after 2.6.0-test5 >> >> >>Yup, we've seen similar regression on tiobench and reaim workloads. >> >>On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 08:37:45PM -0400, rwhron@earthlink.net wrote: >> >>>There was about a 50% regression in jobs/minute in AIM7 >>>database workload on quad P3 Xeon. The CPU time has not >>>gone up, so the extra run time is coming from something >>>else. (I/O or I/O scheduler?) >>> >>>tiobench sequential reads has a significant regression too. >>> >>>Regression appears unrelated to filesystem type. >>> >>>dbench was not affected. >>> >>>The AIM7 was run on ext2. >>> >>> >>>
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |