[9fans] sources down?
Hello fans. currently, is sources.cs.bell-labs.com down? on my plan9 box: % ndb/dnsquery sources.cs.bell-labs.com !dns: dns failure plan9.bell-labs.com plan9.bell-labs.com ip 135.104.24.16
Re: [9fans] sources down?
Thanks stevie. My plan9 box resolved sources.cs.bell-labs.com too. Hello fans. currently, is sources.cs.bell-labs.com down? on my plan9 box: % ndb/dnsquery sources.cs.bell-labs.com !dns: dns failure plan9.bell-labs.com plan9.bell-labs.com ip 135.104.24.16 Sources is up again, but it was down for a few hours, I think. sources.cs.bell-labs.com sources.cs.bell-labs.com ip 135.104.24.18 Stevie
Re: [9fans] fossil+venti performance question
Thanks Anthony. I bet if you re-run the same test twice in a row, you’re going to see dramatically improved performance. I try to re-run ‘iostats md5sum /386/9pcf’. Read result is very fast. first read result is 152KB/s. second read result is 232MB/s. Your write performance in that test isn’t really relevant: they’re not hitting the file system at all. I think to write 1GB data to filesystem: iostats dd -if /dev/zero -of output -ibs 1024k -obs 1024k -count 1024 Write result of dd is 31MB/s. But this test may just write to fossil. It may not write to venti. I’m not sure why you’d see a difference in a fossil+venti setup of a different size, but the partition size relationships, and the in-memory cache size relationships, are what’s mostly important. My hardware has 2GB memory. Plan 9 configurations are almost default. (except /dev/sdC0/bloom) To increase memory size is difficult, because memory size is determined by public QEMU/KVM service plan. — kadota
Re: [9fans] fossil+venti performance question
Thanks Aram. I have spent some time debugging this, but unfortunately, I couldn't find the root cause, and I just stopped using fossil. I tried to measure performance effect by replacement of component. 1) mbr or GRUB 2) pbs or pbslba 3) sdata or sdvirtio (sdvirtio is imported from 9legacy) 4) kernel configurations (9pcf, 9pccpuf, 9pcauth, etc) unfortunately, all of the above are no performance effect. — kadota
[9fans] fossil+venti performance question
Hello, fans. I’m running Plan 9(labs) on public QEMU/KVM service. My Plan 9 system has a slow read performance problem. I ran 'iostats md5sum /386/9pcf’, DMA is on, read result is 150KB/s. but write performance is fast. My Plan 9 system has a 200GB HDD, formatted with fossil+venti. disk layout is: - 9fat 100MB - nvram 512B - fossil31.82GB - arenas159.11GB - isect 7.95GB - bloom 512MB - swap 512MB Also, I explained other installations. 1)200GB HDD with fossil only. 2)100GB HDD with fossil+venti. Read performance is fast (about 15MB/s) both installations. Could you tell me the reason?
