You guys are making this harder than it needs to be. Try this:
sync# To make sure nothing else is writing
dd if=/dev/zero of=file bs=1M count=1024 oflag=dsync
You'll get reasonable numbers this way out of dd.
-J
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 02:43:04PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> What you
You guys are making this harder than it needs to be. Try this:
sync# To make sure nothing else is writing
dd if=/dev/zero of=file bs=1M count=1024 oflag=dsync
You'll get reasonable numbers this way out of dd.
-J
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 02:43:04PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
What you want
Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote:
Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also give more
Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote:
Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also give more
On Saturday 20 January 2007 22:41, Stephen Clark wrote:
>Willy Tarreau wrote:
>>On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote:
>>>Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote:
Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also
On 1/21/07, Tim Schmielau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes. You have a faster Disk that writes about 45 MB/s. But I am not sure I
understand what you want to know?
I got these results with a customized 2.6.20-rc5.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] kernel]$ uname -a
Linux Typhoon 2.6.20-rc5-Topol-M #1 SMP Sun
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Sunil Naidu wrote:
> On 1/21/07, Tim Schmielau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Note that these dd "benchmarks" are completely bogus, because the data
> > doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening
> > data, try
> >
> > time dd if=/dev/zero
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:39:25PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:10:22PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> > >
> > > > also explains why you see better results is writeout starts
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:39:25PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:10:22PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> > >
> > > Note that these dd "benchmarks" are completely bogus, because the data
> > > doesn't actually get written to
On 1/21/07, Tim Schmielau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Note that these dd "benchmarks" are completely bogus, because the data
doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening
data, try
time dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/1GB bs=1M count=1024; time sync
The dd returns as soon
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:10:22PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> >
> > Note that these dd "benchmarks" are completely bogus, because the data
> > doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening
> > data, try
> >
> > time dd
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:28:57PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> > Anyway, in your situation with a very small buffer, this should not
> > change by more than half a second or so.
>
> Well, his buffer is not small. He has half a GB of RAM, so when
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Anyway, in your situation with a very small buffer, this should not
> change by more than half a second or so.
Well, his buffer is not small. He has half a GB of RAM, so when
writing 1 GB the buffer would roughly double the dd speed, exactly as he
Hi Tim,
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:10:22PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
>
> > 20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde ??unlar?? yazmt??n??z:
> > [...]
> > > > vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
> > > >
> > > > /dev/hda:
> > > > Timing cached reads: 1576
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
> 20 Oca 2007 Cts 22:10 tarihinde, Tim Schmielau şunları yazmıştı:
> >
> > Note that these dd "benchmarks" are completely bogus, because the data=20
> > doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening=20
> > data, try
> >
> >
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 10:16:15PM +0200, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
> 20 Oca 2007 Cts 22:10 tarihinde, Tim Schmielau ??unlar?? yazmt??:
> [...]
> >
> > Note that these dd "benchmarks" are completely bogus, because the data=20
> > doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some
20 Oca 2007 Cts 22:10 tarihinde, Tim Schmielau şunları yazmıştı:
[...]
>
> Note that these dd "benchmarks" are completely bogus, because the data=20
> doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening=20
> data, try
>
> time dd if=3D/dev/zero of=3D/tmp/1GB bs=3D1M
20 Oca 2007 Cts 22:05 tarihinde, Willy Tarreau şunları yazmıştı:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 01:14:41AM +0530, Sunil Naidu wrote:
> > On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> It should not have changed the throughput at all if the
> hardware was not a bit strange (well, it's a
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
> 20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde şunları yazmıştınız:
> [...]
> > > vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
> > >
> > > /dev/hda:
> > > Timing cached reads: 1576 MB in 2.00 seconds = 788.18 MB/sec
> > > Timing buffered disk reads: 74 MB in 3.01
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote:
> Sunil Naidu wrote:
>
> >On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
> >>you do something else during that time, or also give more
On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 01:14:41AM +0530, Sunil Naidu wrote:
> On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > >
> >
> >It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
> >you do something else during that time, or also give more responsiveness
> >to Ctrl-C. It is
Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also give more responsiveness
to Ctrl-C. It is possible that you have fast and slow RAM, or that your
video
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also give more responsiveness
to Ctrl-C. It is possible that you have fast and slow RAM, or that your
video card uses shared
20 Oca 2007 Cts 20:03 tarihinde şunları yazmıştınız:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 07:52:53PM +0200, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
> > 20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde ??unlar?? yazmt??n??z:
> > [...]
> >
> > > > vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
> > > >
> > > > /dev/hda:
> > > > Timing cached reads:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 07:52:53PM +0200, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
> 20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde ??unlar?? yazmt??n??z:
> [...]
> > > vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
> > >
> > > /dev/hda:
> > > Timing cached reads: 1576 MB in 2.00 seconds = 788.18 MB/sec
> > > Timing buffered disk
20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde şunları yazmıştınız:
[...]
> > vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
> >
> > /dev/hda:
> > Timing cached reads: 1576 MB in 2.00 seconds = 788.18 MB/sec
> > Timing buffered disk reads: 74 MB in 3.01 seconds = 24.55 MB/sec
> >
> >
> > [~]> time dd if=/dev/zero
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 07:20:53PM +0200, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I own a Sony Vaio VGN-FS285B and disk performance to say at least is very
> very
> slow. Writing 1 GB data makes the laptop unresponsive. Here is some data
> identifying the drive. Hope someone can tell me how to
Hi all,
I own a Sony Vaio VGN-FS285B and disk performance to say at least is very very
slow. Writing 1 GB data makes the laptop unresponsive. Here is some data
identifying the drive. Hope someone can tell me how to debug and find out
whats the problem.
FWIW since 2.6.16 the problem is same
Hi all,
I own a Sony Vaio VGN-FS285B and disk performance to say at least is very very
slow. Writing 1 GB data makes the laptop unresponsive. Here is some data
identifying the drive. Hope someone can tell me how to debug and find out
whats the problem.
FWIW since 2.6.16 the problem is same
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 07:20:53PM +0200, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
Hi all,
I own a Sony Vaio VGN-FS285B and disk performance to say at least is very
very
slow. Writing 1 GB data makes the laptop unresponsive. Here is some data
identifying the drive. Hope someone can tell me how to debug
20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde şunları yazmıştınız:
[...]
vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing cached reads: 1576 MB in 2.00 seconds = 788.18 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 74 MB in 3.01 seconds = 24.55 MB/sec
[~] time dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/1GB bs=1M
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 07:52:53PM +0200, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde ??unlar?? yazmt??n??z:
[...]
vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing cached reads: 1576 MB in 2.00 seconds = 788.18 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 74 MB in
20 Oca 2007 Cts 20:03 tarihinde şunları yazmıştınız:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 07:52:53PM +0200, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde ??unlar?? yazmt??n??z:
[...]
vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing cached reads: 1576 MB in 2.00 seconds
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also give more responsiveness
to Ctrl-C. It is possible that you have fast and slow RAM, or that your
video card uses shared
Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also give more responsiveness
to Ctrl-C. It is possible that you have fast and slow RAM, or that your
video
On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 01:14:41AM +0530, Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also give more responsiveness
to Ctrl-C. It is possible that you
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote:
Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also give more responsiveness
to Ctrl-C.
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde şunları yazmıştınız:
[...]
vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing cached reads: 1576 MB in 2.00 seconds = 788.18 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 74 MB in 3.01 seconds = 24.55 MB/sec
20 Oca 2007 Cts 22:05 tarihinde, Willy Tarreau şunları yazmıştı:
On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 01:14:41AM +0530, Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
It should not have changed the throughput at all if the
hardware was not a bit strange (well, it's a VAIO
20 Oca 2007 Cts 22:10 tarihinde, Tim Schmielau şunları yazmıştı:
[...]
Note that these dd benchmarks are completely bogus, because the data=20
doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening=20
data, try
time dd if=3D/dev/zero of=3D/tmp/1GB bs=3D1M count=3D1024;
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 10:16:15PM +0200, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
20 Oca 2007 Cts 22:10 tarihinde, Tim Schmielau ??unlar?? yazmt??:
[...]
Note that these dd benchmarks are completely bogus, because the data=20
doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening=20
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
20 Oca 2007 Cts 22:10 tarihinde, Tim Schmielau şunları yazmıştı:
Note that these dd benchmarks are completely bogus, because the data=20
doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening=20
data, try
time dd
Hi Tim,
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:10:22PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Ismail Dönmez wrote:
20 Oca 2007 Cts 19:45 tarihinde ??unlar?? yazmt??n??z:
[...]
vaio cartman # hdparm -tT /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing cached reads: 1576 MB in 2.00 seconds =
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
Anyway, in your situation with a very small buffer, this should not
change by more than half a second or so.
Well, his buffer is not small. He has half a GB of RAM, so when
writing 1 GB the buffer would roughly double the dd speed, exactly as he
has
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:28:57PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
Anyway, in your situation with a very small buffer, this should not
change by more than half a second or so.
Well, his buffer is not small. He has half a GB of RAM, so when
writing
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:10:22PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
Note that these dd benchmarks are completely bogus, because the data
doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening
data, try
time dd if=/dev/zero
On 1/21/07, Tim Schmielau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that these dd benchmarks are completely bogus, because the data
doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening
data, try
time dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/1GB bs=1M count=1024; time sync
The dd returns as soon as
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:39:25PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:10:22PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
Note that these dd benchmarks are completely bogus, because the data
doesn't actually get written to disk in that
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:39:25PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:10:22PM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
also explains why you see better results is writeout starts earlier.
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/21/07, Tim Schmielau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that these dd benchmarks are completely bogus, because the data
doesn't actually get written to disk in that time. For some enlightening
data, try
time dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/1GB bs=1M
On 1/21/07, Tim Schmielau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. You have a faster Disk that writes about 45 MB/s. But I am not sure I
understand what you want to know?
I got these results with a customized 2.6.20-rc5.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] kernel]$ uname -a
Linux Typhoon 2.6.20-rc5-Topol-M #1 SMP Sun Jan
Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote:
Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something else during that time, or also
On Saturday 20 January 2007 22:41, Stephen Clark wrote:
Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote:
Sunil Naidu wrote:
On 1/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not expected to increase write performance, but it should help
you do something
54 matches
Mail list logo
