From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, lkp@01.org
Subject: Re: [writeback] 6903673566d: +2.5% fileio.requests_per_sec
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 21:27:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140410192751.GE8060@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140410130552.GA17871@localhost>
On Thu 10-04-14 21:05:52, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 08:41:37PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Here are the changed stats before/after the patchset:
Thanks for gathering the numbers!
> v3.14-rc8 ea87e2e7e0905325c58cf5643
> --------------- -------------------------
> 58.98 ~102% -73.2% 15.78 snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-ext4-64G-1024-rndwr-sync
> 2215.64 ~61% -69.2% 682.57 snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-ext4-64G-1024-seqrewr-sync
> 185.22 ~132% -93.6% 11.80 snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-xfs-64G-1024-rndwr-sync
> 2459.84 ~67% -71.1% 710.15 TOTAL fileio.request_latency_max_ms
>
> v3.14-rc8 ea87e2e7e0905325c58cf5643
> --------------- -------------------------
> 6251 ~ 0% +4.0% 6503 snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-ext4-64G-1024-seqrewr-sync
> 6532 ~ 0% +3.2% 6737 ~ 0% snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-xfs-64G-1024-seqrewr-sync
> 6444 ~ 0% +1.7% 6554 ~ 0% snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-xfs-64G-1024-seqwr-sync
> 19227 ~ 0% +3.0% 19795 TOTAL fileio.requests_per_sec
>
So fileio got better latency and higher requests per second. That's good.
...
> v3.14-rc8 ea87e2e7e0905325c58cf5643
> --------------- -------------------------
> 397285 ~ 0% -6.9% 369872 ~ 0% lkp-st02/micro/dd-write/11HDD-RAID5-cfq-xfs-10dd
> 359312 ~ 0% -5.5% 339685 lkp-ws02/micro/dd-write/11HDD-RAID5-cfq-xfs-100dd
> 404981 ~ 0% -4.5% 386775 lkp-ws02/micro/dd-write/11HDD-RAID5-cfq-xfs-10dd
> 1161579 ~ 0% -5.6% 1096334 TOTAL iostat.md0.wkB/s
So dd writing tests got lower throughput reported by iostat. I'll try to
have a look whether I can reproduce that. BTW: Does that also correspond to
longer time-to-completion of the dd test?
> v3.14-rc8 ea87e2e7e0905325c58cf5643
> --------------- -------------------------
> 1.2e+08 ~ 0% +4.0% 1.249e+08 snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-ext4-64G-1024-seqrewr-sync
> 1.254e+08 ~ 0% +3.1% 1.294e+08 ~ 0% snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-xfs-64G-1024-seqrewr-sync
> 1.237e+08 ~ 0% +1.7% 1.259e+08 ~ 0% snb-drag/sysbench/fileio/600s-100%-1HDD-xfs-64G-1024-seqwr-sync
> 3.692e+08 ~ 0% +3.0% 3.801e+08 TOTAL time.file_system_outputs
What's this measuring?
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-10 19:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-10 12:41 Fengguang Wu
2014-04-10 13:05 ` Fengguang Wu
2014-04-10 19:27 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2014-04-11 5:12 ` Fengguang Wu
2014-04-10 13:08 ` Fengguang Wu
2014-04-10 13:17 ` Fengguang Wu
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=20140410192751.GE8060@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.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®