Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Weird\s+performance\s+decrease\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Weird\s+performance\s+decrease\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: Sascha Nitsch <sgi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 10:28:08 +0100; I'm observing a rather strange behaviour of the filesystem cache algorithm. I have a server running the following app scenario: A filesystem tree with a depth of 7 directories and 4 character direct; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00024.html (9,090 bytes)
2. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: Sascha Nitsch <sgi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 12:31:26 +0100; The files themself are not fragmentented. They only get (re)written at once. No appends. But a couple of the directories have extends. Examples: 0354: EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE AG AG-OFFSET TOTAL; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00025.html (12,570 bytes)
3. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: Ruben Rubio <ruben@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 12:05:08 +0100; I have seen that there is performance problems when there is some files in a directory and data is being added in the files. Are the files franmented? Go to a directory where the files are listed, an; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00026.html (11,094 bytes)
4. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: Shailendra Tripathi <stripathi@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:31:15 -0800; Hi Sascha, Did you notice the iostat -x on the device ? Please verify the turnaround time of the device when you are getting the slowdown. For example, if %b is closer towards 100, perhaps you are ma; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00028.html (11,119 bytes)
5. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: Sascha Nitsch <sgi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 11:44:32 +0100; Hi Shailendra, here are some measurements: == startup (very high performance) == top: Cpu0 : 0.2% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 99.8% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si Cpu1 : 0.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 100.0% id; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00030.html (12,290 bytes)
6. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: Shailendra Tripathi <stripathi@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 10:29:22 -0800; Hi Sascha, Please run the iostat continuously to monitor the disk performance. Please monitor the await field and %util field on the device. Looking at this, it does look like there is some bottlenec; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00031.html (13,850 bytes)
7. Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 10:28:08 +0100; I'm observing a rather strange behaviour of the filesystem cache algorithm. I have a server running the following app scenario: A filesystem tree with a depth of 7 directories and 4 character direct; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00232.html (9,090 bytes)
8. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 12:31:26 +0100; The files themself are not fragmentented. They only get (re)written at once. No appends. But a couple of the directories have extends. Examples: 0354: EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE AG AG-OFFSET TOTAL; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00233.html (12,570 bytes)
9. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 12:05:08 +0100; I have seen that there is performance problems when there is some files in a directory and data is being added in the files. Are the files franmented? Go to a directory where the files are listed, an; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00234.html (11,094 bytes)
10. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:31:15 -0800; Hi Sascha, Did you notice the iostat -x on the device ? Please verify the turnaround time of the device when you are getting the slowdown. For example, if %b is closer towards 100, perhaps you are ma; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00236.html (11,119 bytes)
11. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 11:44:32 +0100; Hi Shailendra, here are some measurements: == startup (very high performance) == top: Cpu0 : 0.2% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 99.8% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si Cpu1 : 0.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 100.0% id; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00238.html (12,290 bytes)
12. Re: Weird performance decrease (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 10:29:22 -0800; Hi Sascha, Please run the iostat continuously to monitor the disk performance. Please monitor the await field and %util field on the device. Looking at this, it does look like there is some bottlenec; /archives/xfs/2006-11/msg00239.html (13,850 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]