On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 02:17:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > CFS-v4 is quite smooth in terms of the users experience but after prolonged > observations approaching 24 hours, it appears to choke the cpu hog off a bit > even when the system has nothing else to do. My amanda runs went from 1 to > 1.5 hours depending on how much time it took gzip to handle the amount of > data tar handed it, up to about 165m & change, or nearly 3 hours pretty > consistently over 5 runs.
Welcome to infinite history. I'm not surprised, apart from the time scale of anomalies being much larger than I anticipated. On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 02:17:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > sd-0.44 so far seems to be handling the same load (theres a backup running > right now) fairly well also, and possibly theres a bit more snap to the > system now. A switch to screen 1 from this screen 8, and the loading of that > screen image, which is the Cassini shot of saturn from the backside, the one > showing that teeny dot to the left of Saturn that is actually us, took 10 > seconds with the stock 2.6.21-rc7, 3 seconds with the best of Ingo's patches, > and now with Con's latest, is 1 second flat. Another screen however is 4 > seconds, so maybe that first scren had been looked at since I rebooted. > However, amanda is still getting estimates so gzip hasn't put a tiewrap > around the kernels neck just yet. Not sure what you mean by gzip putting a tiewrap around the kernel's neck. Could you clarify? On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 02:17:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > Some minutes later, gzip is smunching /usr/src, and the machine doesn't even > know its running as sd-0.44 isn't giving gzip more than 75% to gzip, and > probably averaging less than 50%. And it scared me a bit as it started out at > not over 5% for the first minute or so. Running in the 70's now according to > gkrellm, with an occasional blip to 95%. And the machine generally feels > good. I wonder what's behind that sort of initial and steady-state behavior. On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 02:17:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > I had previously given CFS-v4 a 95 score but that was before I saw > the general slowdown, and I believe my first impression of this one > is also a 95. This on a scale of the best one of the earlier CFS > patches being 100, and stock 2.6.21-rc7 gets a 0.0. This scheduler > seems to be giving gzip ever more cpu as time progresses, and the cpu > is warming up quite nicely, from about 132F idling to 149.9F now. > And my keyboard is still alive and well. > Generally speaking, Con, I believe this one is also a keeper. And we'll see > how long a backup run takes. Pardon my saying so but you appear to be describing anomalous behavior in terms of "scheduler warmups." - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
