Mark van Walraven wrote:
> I'm afraid nothing springs to mind ... google and read and read and read
> and then experiment with your own workloads.
thanks, I was just checking with you any recomendation on what to read...
Or.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received thi
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 09:25:37AM +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Thanks a lot for sharing your experience and thoughts, any good
> article/paper (e.g OLS) you can recommend on this matter?
I'm afraid nothing springs to mind ... google and read and read and read
and then experiment with your own work
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Mark van Walraven >
> In my experience, noop works well on the initiator. On the target,
> deadline is slightly better than noop on the target for the workloads
> I see, on my equipment, YMMV.
Thanks a lot for sharing your experience and thoughts, any good
arti
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 09:28:31PM +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Sorry, but why file system over block device whose scheduler being
> noop is a bad idea?
The noop scheduler doesn't re-order requests, so concurrent accesses to
multiple files will cause lots of extra seeking and throughput collapses.
>> Does anyone know why noop is not the default I/O scheduler?
> It is a very bad idea in case of using a filesystem which is usually the
> point.
Sorry, but why file system over block device whose scheduler being
noop is a bad idea?
Or.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Y
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 09:13:10PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>
> Or Gerlitz wrote:
> > Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> >> You can select the no-op I/O elevator and you can also use direct IO
> >> like with sg_dd from the sg_utils package
> >>
> > Does anyone know why noop is not the default I/O schedul
Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> You can select the no-op I/O elevator and you can also use direct IO
>> like with sg_dd from the sg_utils package
>>
> Does anyone know why noop is not the default I/O scheduler?
>
It is a very bad idea in case of using a filesystem which is usually
Erez Zilber wrote:
>>>
>> You can select the no-op I/O elevator and you can also use direct IO
>> like with sg_dd from the sg_utils package
>>
>
> I'm using noop already, but that didn't help. I'll try to ask in lkml.
>
> Thanks,
> Erez
>
Using the sg3-utils package sg_dd command you can issue
Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> You can select the no-op I/O elevator and you can also use direct IO
> like with sg_dd from the sg_utils package
>
Does anyone know why noop is not the default I/O scheduler?
Or.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>
> Mike Christie wrote:
>> Erez Zilber wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Mike Christie
>>> wrote:
Erez Zilber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm running a setup of open-iscsi connected to a target. When I run
> I/O from th
Mike Christie wrote:
> Erez Zilber wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
>>> Erez Zilber wrote:
Hi,
I'm running a setup of open-iscsi connected to a target. When I run
I/O from the initiator (e.g using dd) with transaction size of 128kB,
I somet
Erez Zilber wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
>> Erez Zilber wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm running a setup of open-iscsi connected to a target. When I run
>>> I/O from the initiator (e.g using dd) with transaction size of 128kB,
>>> I sometimes see that 2 128kB requests
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Ulrich Windl
wrote:
>
> On 18 Feb 2009 at 8:44, Erez Zilber wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
>> >
>> > Erez Zilber wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I'm running a setup of open-iscsi connected to a target. When I run
>> >> I/O fro
On 18 Feb 2009 at 8:44, Erez Zilber wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
> >
> > Erez Zilber wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm running a setup of open-iscsi connected to a target. When I run
> >> I/O from the initiator (e.g using dd) with transaction size of 128kB,
> >>
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
>
> Erez Zilber wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm running a setup of open-iscsi connected to a target. When I run
>> I/O from the initiator (e.g using dd) with transaction size of 128kB,
>> I sometimes see that 2 128kB requests are aggregated to a sing
Erez Zilber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm running a setup of open-iscsi connected to a target. When I run
> I/O from the initiator (e.g using dd) with transaction size of 128kB,
> I sometimes see that 2 128kB requests are aggregated to a single 256kB
> request. This is rare, but it happens from time to ti
Hi,
I'm running a setup of open-iscsi connected to a target. When I run
I/O from the initiator (e.g using dd) with transaction size of 128kB,
I sometimes see that 2 128kB requests are aggregated to a single 256kB
request. This is rare, but it happens from time to time. Can I disable
this feature?
17 matches
Mail list logo