On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 10:32:53AM +, Dieter wrote:
> > Did this problem start before you made port2file run with rtprio?
>
> Yes. I only added rtprio because it wasn't working.
>
> > Can you please include a copy of your kernel configuration file and dmesg?
>
> I think you asked that befor
> Did this problem start before you made port2file run with rtprio?
Yes. I only added rtprio because it wasn't working.
> Can you please include a copy of your kernel configuration file and dmesg?
I think you asked that before: :-)
> > OK, that's correct. Can you also provide details of
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 05:41:51PM +, Dieter wrote:
> > However, I don't know what you mean by "data is lost". Data should
> > never be lost from the filesystem regardless of how slow the I/O is
> > happening, unless there's something else going wrong (e.g. driver
> > bug).
> >
> > Also, rtp
> > > > > > > > hw.ata.wc=3D3D3D3D0
> > > > > > > ^^^
> > > > > > > "Make my hard drive go rally slow please (just in case I cr=
> ash)=3D
> > > " :)
> > > > > >=3D3D20
> > > > > > Slower, yes, but not *that* slow.
> > > > > >=3D3D20
> > > > > > Normal ls : 0.032 second.
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 03:21:46PM +, Dieter wrote:
> > > > > > > hw.ata.wc=3D3D3D0
> > > > > > ^^^
> > > > > > "Make my hard drive go rally slow please (just in case I crash)=
> > " :)
> > > > >=3D20
> > > > > Slower, yes, but not *that* slow.
> > > > >=3D20
> > > > > Nor
> > > > > > hw.ata.wc=3D3D3D0
> > > > > ^^^
> > > > > "Make my hard drive go rally slow please (just in case I crash)=
> " :)
> > > >=3D20
> > > > Slower, yes, but not *that* slow.
> > > >=3D20
> > > > Normal ls : 0.032 second. Two processes using same disk, multiply by=
>
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 09:35:08AM +, Dieter wrote:
> > > > > hw.ata.wc=3D3D0
> > > > ^^^
> > > > "Make my hard drive go rally slow please (just in case I crash)" :)
> > >=20
> > > Slower, yes, but not *that* slow.
> > >=20
> > > Normal ls : 0.032 second. Two processe
Here's another oddity:
With one process reading from ad4, crunching data, writing to ad2:
4 usersLoad 0.31 0.47 0.67 Nov 23 10:05
Mem:KBREALVIRTUAL VN PAGER SWAP PAGER
Tot Share TotShareFree in out
> > > > hw.ata.wc=3D3D0
> > > ^^^
> > > "Make my hard drive go rally slow please (just in case I crash)" :)
> >=20
> > Slower, yes, but not *that* slow.
> >=20
> > Normal ls : 0.032 second. Two processes using same disk, multiply by two,
> > so 0.064 second. Maybe the
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 11:29:16PM +, Dieter wrote:
> > > hw.ata.wc=3D0
> > ^^^
> > "Make my hard drive go rally slow please (just in case I crash)" :)
>
> Slower, yes, but not *that* slow.
>
> Normal ls : 0.032 second. Two processes using same disk, multiply by two,
>
> > hw.ata.wc=3D0
> ^^^
> "Make my hard drive go rally slow please (just in case I crash)" :)
Slower, yes, but not *that* slow.
Normal ls : 0.032 second. Two processes using same disk, multiply by two,
so 0.064 second. Maybe the multiplier is more than 2, call it 10x, so
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 07:41:46PM +, Dieter wrote:
> > oad
> > > > > > have been trimmed from your email.
> > > > >=3D20
> > > > > In telnet window 1:
> > > > >=3D20
> > > > > cd /disk1/
> > > > > cp -ip very_big_file /disk2/bar/ (the workload)
> > > > >=3D20
> > > > > In telnet window 2
> > > > > > time ls on a small directory on disk2
> > > > > >=3D3D20
> > > > > > real4m51.911s
> > > > > > user0m0.000s
> > > > > > sys 0m0.002s
> > > > > >=3D3D20
> > > > > > I expect access to a busy disk to take longer, but 5 minutes is
> > > > > > a bit much. And that's the root di
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 06:12:06PM +, Dieter wrote:
> > > > > time ls on a small directory on disk2
> > > > >=3D20
> > > > > real4m51.911s
> > > > > user0m0.000s
> > > > > sys 0m0.002s
> > > > >=3D20
> > > > > I expect access to a busy disk to take longer, but 5 minutes is
> > > >
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kris Kennaway writes:
>
> --mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 11:02:54AM +, Dieter wrote:
> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kri
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 11:02:54AM +, Dieter wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kris Kennaway writes:
>
> > > > I'm surprised that you're seeing that much of a "hang". Even if the di=
> > sks
> > > > are busy, the system should slow down all disk processes equally, so no
> > > > one pro
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kris Kennaway writes:
> > > I'm surprised that you're seeing that much of a "hang". Even if the di=
> sks
> > > are busy, the system should slow down all disk processes equally, so no
> > > one process "blocks", but they're all a little slower.
> >=20
> > I collect
On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 11:12:38PM +, Dieter wrote:
> > I'm surprised that you're seeing that much of a "hang". Even if the disks
> > are busy, the system should slow down all disk processes equally, so no
> > one process "blocks", but they're all a little slower.
>
> I collected a bit of dat
> I'm surprised that you're seeing that much of a "hang". Even if the disks
> are busy, the system should slow down all disk processes equally, so no
> one process "blocks", but they're all a little slower.
I collected a bit of data:
While copying a large file from disk1 to disk2,
time ls on a
19 matches
Mail list logo
