From: Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com>
To: Mark Hahn <hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: hdparm -tT reports "suspicious results" ???
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 15:21:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200304061523_MC3-1-3348-4760@compuserve.com> (raw)
Mark Hahn wrote:
>does "PII ODP" mean a PII in an adapter that fits into a P6 socket?
It is a factory Intel PII/333 with an HSF that fits in Socket 8.
With its 512K full-speed cache it makes a PPro into a half-decent machine.
Too bad they're so rare...
>> /dev/hde:
>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 2.62 seconds = 48.85 MB/sec
>
> hmm, slower dram and/or FSB.
No, same exact machine in _every_ way, just a different kernel. It is
slow ECC EDO memory, though.
>> /dev/hde:
>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 2.66 seconds = 48.14 MB/sec
>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 3.90 seconds = 16.41 MB/sec.>
>
> dram is still slow, but disk appears slower yet, so not obviously
> contaminating the measurement.
..and that's 2.5 which measures much lower but doesn't seem to be that
slow (still not tested, I'm testing RAID1 patches on 2.4 now.)
> 53073H4, ecs k7s6a-pro, athlon/"1800", DDR:
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.48 seconds =266.67 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.04 seconds = 31.37 MB/sec
3 x 33073H3, RAID1, Abit KT7A-RAID, Tbird 1333, PC133 SDRAM:
Personalities : [raid0] [raid1]
read_ahead 24 sectors
md2 : active raid1 hdg9[0] hde8[2] hda8[1]
2409600 blocks [3/3] [UUU]
2.4.21-pre6:
/dev/md2:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.58 seconds =220.69 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.71 seconds = 23.62 MB/sec
2.4.20aa1ce1(unreleased):
/dev/md2:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.59 seconds =216.95 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.67 seconds = 38.32 MB/sec
I have RAID1 patches that give 55% sequential IO improvements on K7 but
they're not showing the same gains on the PPro (<20% so far.) Kernel,
chipset, CPU and disk controller are all different, though I expected
to get proportional gains on any hardware.
AFAICT hdparm says "suspicious results" when the disk speed is greater
than one-half the buffer speed. I just got 51.20 and 26.34 on the PPro
with my patches and the message came out again.
--
Chuck
I am not a number!
next reply other threads:[~2003-04-06 19:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-06 19:21 Chuck Ebbert [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-06 13:13 Chuck Ebbert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200304061523_MC3-1-3348-4760@compuserve.com \
--to=76306.1226@compuserve.com \
--cc=hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®