From: "Manish Regmi" <regmi.manish@gmail.com>
To: "Erik Mouw" <mouw@nl.linux.org>, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au
Cc: kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux disk performance.
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 12:07:14 +0545 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <652016d30612182222h7fde4ea5jbc0927c8ebeae76a@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061218130702.GA14984@gateway.home>
On 12/18/06, Erik Mouw <mouw@nl.linux.org> wrote:
<...snip...>
> >
> > But isn't O_DIRECT supposed to bypass buffering in Kernel?
>
> It is.
>
> > Doesn't it directly write to disk?
>
> Yes, but it still uses an IO scheduler.
>
Ok. but i also tried with noop to turnoff disk scheduling effects.
There was still timing differences. Usually i get 3100 microseconds
but upto 20000 microseconds at certain intervals. I am just using
gettimeofday between two writes to read the timing.
> In your first message you mentioned you were using an ancient 2.6.10
> kernel. That kernel uses the anticipatory IO scheduler. Update to the
> latest stable kernel (2.6.19.1 at time of writing) and it will default
> to the CFQ scheduler which has a smoother writeout, plus you can give
> your process a different IO scheduling class and level (see
> Documentation/block/ioprio.txt).
Thanks... i will try with CFQ.
Nick Piggin:
> but
> they look like they might be a (HZ quantised) delay coming from
> block layer plugging.
Sorry i didn´t understand what you mean.
To minimise scheduling effects i tried giving it maximum priority.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
regards
Manish Regmi
---------------------------------------------------------------
UNIX without a C Compiler is like eating Spaghetti with your mouth
sewn shut. It just doesn't make sense.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-19 6:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-18 4:07 Manish Regmi
2006-12-18 8:35 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-12-18 12:39 ` Manish Regmi
2006-12-18 12:54 ` Nick Piggin
2006-12-18 13:07 ` Erik Mouw
2006-12-19 6:22 ` Manish Regmi [this message]
2006-12-19 6:38 ` Nick Piggin
2006-12-19 12:18 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-12-20 11:17 ` Manish Regmi
2006-12-22 0:14 ` Bhanu Kalyan Chetlapalli
2006-12-22 5:30 ` Manish Regmi
2006-12-22 5:39 ` Bhanu Kalyan Chetlapalli
2006-12-22 5:56 ` Manish Regmi
2006-12-20 22:29 ` Bill Davidsen
2006-12-21 6:03 ` Manish Regmi
2006-12-21 7:15 ` Daniel Cheng
2006-12-21 13:22 ` Erik Mouw
2006-12-22 5:39 ` Manish Regmi
2006-12-27 15:50 ` Phillip Susi
2007-01-01 1:59 ` Bill Davidsen
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=652016d30612182222h7fde4ea5jbc0927c8ebeae76a@mail.gmail.com \
--to=regmi.manish@gmail.com \
--cc=kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mouw@nl.linux.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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
Powered by JetHome