Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <42EBD958.6040402_at_elischer.org>, Julian Elischer writes: > > >>>If you know your queue-theory, you also know why busy% is >>>a pointless measurement: It represents the amount of time >>>where the queue is non-empty. It doesn't say anything about >>>how quickly the queue drains or fills. >> >>exactly.. I'm trying to work out why teh read and write queues are empty for so >>much time in a transaction that SHOULD be disk bound.... > > > I am very confident that the disk statistics collected in GEOM don't lie: > your disks are idle because nobody submits I/O requests. > > Look at your scheduler... I plan on doing just that.. I didn't say it was a problem in geom.. I just said that it is worth investigating why there is no cannel saturation when in theory that should be teh bottleneck. I have noticed this before.. 5 & 6 sometimes just don't seem to be "trying". they often have idle time when I would expect none.Received on Sat Jul 30 2005 - 20:31:45 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:40 UTC