From: Ishikawa <ishikawa@yk.rim.or.jp>
To: Douglas Gilbert <dougg@torque.net>
Cc: Mike Black <mblack@csihq.com>,
Jeremy Hansen <jeremy@xxedgexx.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, mysql@lists.mysql.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: scsi vs ide performance on fsync's
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 06:28:49 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3AA2B390.12819DD2@yk.rim.or.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0103021033190.6176-200000@srv2.ecropolis.com> <054201c0a33d$55ee5870$e1de11cc@csihq.com> <3AA2A120.49509A11@torque.net>
Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> There is definitely something strange going on here.
> As the bonnie test below shows, the SCSI disk used
> for my tests should vastly outperform the old IDE one:
First thank you and others with my clueless investigation about
the module loading under Debian GNU/Linux. (I should have known
that Debian uses a very special module setup.)
Anyway, I used to think SCSI is better than IDE in general, and
the post was quite surprising.
So I ran the test on my PC.
On my systems too, the IDE beats SCSI hand down with the test case.
BTW, has anyone noticed that
the elapsed time of SCSI case is TWICE as long if
we let the previous output of the test program stay before
running the second test? (I suspect fdatasync
takes time proportional to the (then current) file size, but
still why SCSI case is so long is beyond me.)
Eg.
ishikawa@duron$ ls -l /tmp/t.out
ls: /tmp/t.out: No such file or directory
ishikawa@duron$ time ./xlog /tmp/t.out fsync
real 0m38.673s <=== my scsi disk is slow one to begin with...
user 0m0.050s
sys 0m0.140s
ishikawa@duron$ ls -l /tmp/t.out
-rw-r--r-- 1 ishikawa users 112000 Mar 5 06:19 /tmp/t.out
ishikawa@duron$ time ./xlog /tmp/t.out fsync
real 1m16.928s <=== See TWICE as long!
user 0m0.060s
sys 0m0.160s
ishikawa@duron$ ls -l /tmp/t.out
-rw-r--r-- 1 ishikawa users 112000 Mar 5 06:20 /tmp/t.out
ishikawa@duron$ rm /tmp/t.out <==== REMOVE the file and try again.
ishikawa@duron$ time ./xlog /tmp/t.out fsync
real 0m40.667s <==== Half as long and back to original.
user 0m0.040s
sys 0m0.120s
iishikawa@duron$ time ./xlog /tmp/t.out xxx
real 0m0.012s <=== very fast without fdatasync as it should be.
user 0m0.010s
sys 0m0.010s
ishikawa@duron$
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-04 21:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0103021033190.6176-200000@srv2.ecropolis.com>
[not found] ` <054201c0a33d$55ee5870$e1de11cc@csihq.com>
2001-03-04 20:10 ` Douglas Gilbert
2001-03-04 21:28 ` Ishikawa [this message]
2001-03-06 0:11 ` Douglas Gilbert
[not found] <1epyyz1.etswlv1kmicnqM%smurf@noris.de>
2001-03-09 6:59 ` Matthias Urlichs
2001-03-09 11:51 ` Jens Axboe
2001-03-09 14:26 ` Matthias Urlichs
2001-03-07 12:47 David Balazic
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-03-06 19:42 David Balazic
2001-03-06 20:37 ` Jens Axboe
2001-03-07 13:51 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-07 14:12 ` Jens Axboe
2001-03-07 15:05 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-07 18:51 ` Jens Axboe
2001-03-07 19:10 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-07 20:15 ` Jens Axboe
2001-03-07 20:56 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-07 20:59 ` Jens Axboe
2001-03-08 15:45 ` Chris Mason
2001-03-06 17:14 David Balazic
2001-03-06 17:46 ` Gregory Maxwell
2001-03-06 18:23 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-06 23:27 ` Mark Hahn
2001-03-06 5:27 Douglas Gilbert
2001-03-06 5:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-06 7:12 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-03-06 12:09 ` Alan Cox
2001-03-06 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-07 13:48 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-07 14:13 ` Jens Axboe
2001-03-12 18:50 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-03-06 13:50 ` Mike Black
2001-03-06 16:02 ` Jeremy Hansen
2001-03-07 18:27 ` Jeremy Hansen
2001-03-07 18:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-08 11:06 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-06 16:57 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-06 6:43 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-06 13:03 ` dean gaudet
2001-03-06 13:15 ` dean gaudet
2001-03-06 13:45 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-02 17:42 Jeremy Hansen
2001-03-02 18:39 ` Steve Lord
2001-03-02 19:17 ` Chris Mason
2001-03-02 19:25 ` Steve Lord
2001-03-02 19:27 ` Jeremy Hansen
2001-03-02 19:38 ` Chris Mason
2001-03-02 19:41 ` Steve Lord
2001-03-05 13:23 ` Andi Kleen
2001-03-02 19:25 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-03-03 1:55 ` Dan Hollis
2001-03-02 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-06 2:13 ` Jeremy Hansen
2001-03-06 2:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-06 3:30 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-06 4:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-06 7:03 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-03-06 8:24 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-06 12:22 ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-06 14:08 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-07 16:50 ` Pavel Machek
2001-03-06 19:41 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-03-07 5:25 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-07 6:58 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-03-09 11:39 ` Jonathan Morton
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=3AA2B390.12819DD2@yk.rim.or.jp \
--to=ishikawa@yk.rim.or.jp \
--cc=dougg@torque.net \
--cc=jeremy@xxedgexx.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mblack@csihq.com \
--cc=mysql@lists.mysql.com \
/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®