> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edward Schernau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 11:19 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: help interpret tiobench.pl results?
>
> I get:
>
> File Block Num Seq Read Rand Read Seq Write Rand
> Write
> Dir Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate
> (CPU%)
> ------- ------ ------- --- ----------- ----------- -----------
> -----------
> . 200 4096 1 21.57 12.0% 0.634 1.13% 19.67 24.0% 1.080
> 1.86%
> . 200 4096 2 16.24 10.1% 0.646 0.84% 19.86 35.7% 1.128
> 2.67%
> . 200 4096 4 15.35 9.90% 0.652 0.83% 19.69 36.8% 1.123
> 2.80%
> . 200 4096 8 14.82 9.93% 0.671 0.82% 19.56 38.0% 1.126
> 2.92%
>
> The machine only has 64MB of RAM, and it was in X, with Netscape
> running,
> so very little memory was free. Seems ok, but the Rand tests seem
> pretty pitiful.
I think that's the point. Random tests aren't fast, because there's a lot
of seek, read, seek, read overhead. Random reads can't be fast on disks
because of all of the movement. Solid state devices, on the other hand...
> What does this tell me, exactly, esp. as the threads
> increase? And why does Seq. Read drop off, but Seq. Write doesnt?
The sequential reads probably drop off with multiple threads (assuming that
this is a single disk) because it's having to seek between reads. I'm not
sure about the writes. Of course I can't say with 100% certainty, nor can
anybody else, although we can all make good educated guesses.
Greg
