From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759004AbaDJT2Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:28:16 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57001 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753327AbaDJT1y (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:27:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 21:27:51 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Fengguang Wu Cc: Jan Kara , LKML , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, lkp@01.org Subject: Re: [writeback] 6903673566d: +2.5% fileio.requests_per_sec Message-ID: <20140410192751.GE8060@quack.suse.cz> References: <20140410124137.GA17720@localhost> <20140410130552.GA17871@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140410130552.GA17871@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 SUSE Labs, CR