Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> writes: >> And we should probably run our standard set of I/O exercisers at the >> very least. But, like I said, it seems like wasted effort. >> > > Out of curiousity, what do you consider to be the standard set of I/O > exercisers? Yes, that was vague, sorry. I was referring to any io generator that will perform sequential and random I/O (writes, re-writes, reads, random writes, random reads, strided reads, backwards reads, etc). We use iozone internally, testing both buffered and direct I/O, varying file and record sizes and across multiple file systems. Data sets that fall inside of the page cache tend to have a high standard deviation, so, as an I/O guy, I ignore those. ;-) Cheers, Jeff -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>