xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: raw vs XFS sequential write and system load

To: Mario Kadastik <mario.kadastik@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: raw vs XFS sequential write and system load
From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 09:07:43 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <034B199C-F1D2-42F8-B774-58AA11D8C79E@xxxxxxx>
References: <B4D42128-E5B2-48B1-AEF1-586FD90AF605@xxxxxxx> <20071018222357.GN995458@xxxxxxx> <F9DEBD65-7751-4187-97EF-1DF1F63B0888@xxxxxxx> <20071019075949.GS995458@xxxxxxx> <034B199C-F1D2-42F8-B774-58AA11D8C79E@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx


On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Mario Kadastik wrote:

Well to finally summarize, the things pointed out all helped too, but the major change in system behavior came from the fact that 2.6.23 had totally different virtual memory defaults than 2.6.9 and running with 2.6.23 one has to change the dirty_ratio to something bigger to allow for a fast i/o machine to actually handle the load. Now the four nodes we have are all running very nicely and calmly and performing all the tasks we have asked from them, no more see we any congestion etc.

I have summarized my weeks of investigations into a twiki page, comments are welcome:

http://hep.kbfi.ee/index.php/IT/KernelTuning

Thanks for the help,

Mario


Very nice doc!

Thanks.

Justin.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>