I did not change them. I don't know if the kernel did. I will try to notice the next chance I get. With 2.4.28 I have 3 and 31. Guy -----Original Message----- From: linux-raid-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-raid-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Moore Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 11:26 AM To: linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: raid5 performance after upgrade to 2.4.28 Did values change in /proc/sys/vm/{min,max}-readahead? http://lists.us.dell.com/pipermail/linux-poweredge/2004-February/036166.html Guy wrote: > Now the bad news... > > I have 2 CPUs P3-500Mhz, 512Meg ram. So I ran 2 bonnies at the same time. > > Kernel 2.4.20-8 with 2 Bonnies at the same time: > Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random- > -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- > Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP > watkins-ho 1G 3091 85 18593 44 9733 24 3443 97 59895 60 249.6 6 > watkins-ho 1G 2980 87 21176 54 10167 23 3478 99 44525 44 384.2 9 > ---- ----- ----- ---- ------ ----- > Total 6071 39769 19900 6921 104420 633.8 > > Kernel 2.4.28 with 2 Bonnies at the same time: > watkins-ho 1G 4456 92 17922 52 6489 17 4961 96 26571 32 320.4 12 > watkins-ho 1G 4343 89 17987 52 6197 17 4946 96 25646 31 363.7 7 > ---- ----- ----- ---- ------ ----- > Total 8799 35909 12686 9907 52217 684.1 > > Very odd, the sequential read speed is almost exactly 1/2 now. > > Oh well, I still can't tell without a tool to measure the speed. > But I still don't like it! > > My network is only 100BaseT, so it is still well beyond that! > > Guy > > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-raid-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:linux-raid-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Guy > Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 1:17 AM > To: linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: raid5 performance after upgrade to 2.4.28 > > About 1 month ago I upgraded from Kernel 2.4.20-8 to 2.4.28. > Today I noticed my sequential read speed is up by about 12%. > > I don't recall making any other changes that would affect speed. > So, I guess the Kernel upgrade made the difference. > > An old bonnie output: > Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random- > -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- > Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP > watkins-ho 1G 3293 97 34587 89 22306 53 3549 99 67492 63 500.1 9 > > Today: > watkins-ho 1G 4944 99 31719 65 18538 43 5184 98 75440 71 602.5 8 > ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^ > > Some things improved, others decreased. > > Of course, no change I can notice on my own. > I needed to measure performance to notice. > > I guess I should try Kernel 2.6 some day. > > Guy > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- | for direct mail add "private_" in front of user name - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
