On Wed, Aug 18, 1999 at 12:57:06PM -0400, James Manning wrote:
> Whoa... I think I've had "input" and "output" switched in their
> correlation to file reading and file writing... What worries me
> about that is this result from a previous post:
>
> - On partitions(?), s/w raid0 over 2 h/w raid0's (each channel separate)
> - -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
> - -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
> - MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU
> - 2047 22127 98.9 58031 46.4 21058 47.0 23962 89.2 43068 62.1 648.0 7.8
>
> So I wrote blocks at ~58MB/sec and read them at ~43MB/sec?
Looks that way. I also notice that your %cpu for input
is a bit high compared to what I've been seeing.
>
> FWIW, the s/w 5 over h/w 0 has write at 27MB/sec (99.5% CPU util) and read
> at 40MB/sec (63.6% util). Now I know the processors (4 500 MHz Xeons)
> have much more to do than just XOR calcs (and they can only use MMX
> until the KNI code works), but combined with my s/w 0 over the same h/w
> 0's from above, doesn't this mean that my s/w 5 is bottlenecking on the
> 4 500 MHz processors? The find_fastest picked out p5_mmx at ~1070MB/sec
Again your %cpu is high compared to what I've seen. I've never seen
anything at 99%. Anyone else?
Jan Edler
