Re: [gentoo-user] Very bad system response

[Michael Schreckenbauer <grimlog@gmx.de>]

Hi,

Am Mittwoch, 7. Februar 2007 21:19 schrieb Hemmann, Volker Armin:
> On Mittwoch, 7. Februar 2007, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 7. Februar 2007 12:35 schrieb Benno Schulenberg:
> > > Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > > > hdparm /dev/hda
> > > >
> > > > /dev/hda:
> > > >  multcount    = 16 (on)
> > > >  IO_support   =  1 (32-bit)
> > > >  unmaskirq    =  1 (on)
> > > >  using_dma    =  1 (on)
> > > >  keepsettings =  0 (off)
> > > >  readonly     =  0 (off)
> > > >  readahead    = 256 (on)
> > > >  geometry     = 16383/255/63, sectors = 234493056, start = 0
> > >
> > > Maybe set readahead to a smaller value?  Something like 8 or 16?
> > >
> > > At least that's what http://linuxgazette.net/issue79/punk.html
> > > advises.  If you have specific reasons for the higher value, then
> > > please elaborate.
>
> it is a default setting I never touched?
> Aside from 'IO_support' everything is default.

same here.

> Oh, and I tried different io-scheds without any success.

anticipatory and deadline work better for me, but far from perfect. cfq is 
unusable.

> > I believe there is a misunderstanding here. I am the one with the problem
> > not Volker :)
> we have both similar problems ;)

Ah! Nice to hear I am not alone! *g*
googling around, I found some people having a similar problem too, all of them 
are using xfs as I do (eg http://www.thisishull.net/showthread.php?t=219580). 
What's your fs? Mounting with nobarrier didn't work for me :(

Regards,
Michael
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list