From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 24 Jan 2003 16:11:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 24 Jan 2003 16:11:43 -0500 Received: from packet.digeo.com ([12.110.80.53]:7899 "EHLO packet.digeo.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 24 Jan 2003 16:11:42 -0500 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:39:56 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: rwhron@earthlink.net Cc: piggin@cyberone.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: big ext3 sequential write improvement in 2.5.51-mm1 gone in 2.5.53-mm1? Message-Id: <20030124133956.029c4b89.akpm@digeo.com> In-Reply-To: <20030124211906.GA15788@rushmore> References: <20030124211906.GA15788@rushmore> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.9 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Jan 2003 21:20:48.0792 (UTC) FILETIME=[771E9180:01C2C3EE] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org rwhron@earthlink.net wrote: > > > It is important to specify how much memory you have, and how you are > > invoking qsbench. > > There is 3.75 GB of ram. I grab MemTotal from /proc/meminfo, and run > 4 qsbench processes. Each qsbench uses 30% of MemTotal (1089 megs). Yes, 2.5 sucks at that. Run `top', observe how in 2.4, one qsbench instance grabs all the CPU time, then exits. The remaining three can now complete with no swapout at all..