Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.5.65-mm2 | From | "Steven P. Cole" <> | Date | 19 Mar 2003 15:51:47 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2003-03-19 at 15:17, jjs wrote: > Steven P. Cole wrote: > > >I repeated the tests with 2.5.65-mm2 elevator=deadline and the situation > >was similar to elevator=as. Running dbench on ext3, the response to > >desktop switches and window wiggles was improved over running dbench on > >reiserfs, but typing in Evolution was subject to long delays with dbench > >clients greater than 16. > > > >I rebooted with 2.5.65-bk and ran dbench on ext3 again. Everything was > >going smoothly, excellent interactivity, and then with dbench 28, the > >system froze. No response to pings, no response to alt-sysrq-b (after > >alt-sysrq-s). A hard reset was required. Nothing interesting logged. > >Too bad. Before it crashed, 2.5.65-bk was responding to typing in an > >Evolution new message window better than -mm2. > > > > Just out of curiosity, what is the result of: > > cat /proc/sys/sched/max_timeslice? > > Does setting that to e.g. 50 make -mm2 smooth? > > Joe
[root@spc1 steven]# cat /proc/sys/sched/max_timeslice 200 [root@spc1 steven]# echo 50 >/proc/sys/sched/max_timeslice [root@spc1 steven]# cat /proc/sys/sched/max_timeslice 50
Ouch. I inserted the above text saved as a file, and had to wait over a minute after hitting the OK button. I aborted dbench which was running 24 clients on ext3 just to finish this.
The change in max_timeslice didn't seem to improve things.
Apart from the little matter of crashing, 2.5-bk was more usable at that and higher loads.
I'll try the different value of max_timeslice with dbench on reiserfs next. That's where the lack of response was most evident.
Steven - 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/
| |