Hi Dong-Jae, Dong-Jae Kang <baramsori72@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Ryo > Sorry for late reply. > > Mr Lee and I tested total bandwidth as you requested and the result is like > attached file. Thank you for your work. > I know file attaching is not proper in mailing list, > but I selected it for efficient and easy communication. sorry :) > > And Buffed-Device case can be some strange, > it has too much variation in total bandwidth, So you had better to see as > only reference. > The rests didn't have big fluctuation such like Buffered-Device case. > > if you have another request about the result, > reply to me about that. Could you try the test on the weight policy with increaing token to 1280? I guess that the throughput difference between without and with dm-ioband is caused since the token is a little small against the disk speed. > Additionally, I will try to inform the test results in cgroup environment of > you in case by case. > What do you think about it? I would like to know the reason for the diffirence between debug patch and iostat in the prvious test you did (total_bandwidth_result.xls). Thanks, Ryo Tsuruta _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
