New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
hahahahhaahahahahhahaaha
@stevewatson301
No response deserved. You are in lala phantasy land attack mode again. Just because you absolutely positively believe something, it isn't so. And the fact that the usual gang takes your side doesn't change anything either.
Oi c'mon, don't be salty for borta slip. No one holds the score (which is 1:0 by the way).
Will you improve your bench tool on given feedback?
I've been willing to provide any and all results that you've asked for me, and yet you continue engaging in accusations and mudslinging.
The best response that I've been able to elicit from you is a theoretical explanation of why your benchmark may differ from YABS, which promptly fell apart once I provided more evidence. I made a small mistake while writing my initial post (which didn't invalidate the observations in any way), which I was more than happy to correct (it's waiting to be edited by a mod though).
Can you just man up, run the same tests that I've run, yourself, and actually address the issues that I've talked about?
No, won't happen. I was fooled once into providing the source (for v.1) after lots of noise - and virtually nobody downloaded it.
But as I'm a nice person I'll spare you the effort of tracing the binary and provide pseudo code.
Almost no one downloads source so you feel fooled by it, so much so that you'd rather rewrite a selective portion of it as pseudocode than provide the source? The only thing you could be fooled into in that case is wasting time, only that right there wastes more.
What flags are in
read_mode
?This majorly affects performance.
Latest operating systems have Linux kernel 5.4 or higher, so you should use io_uring or at least libaio.
Two files are opened by the disk test:
Here's the syscall profile for the first one:
and the other one:
As I said, I'm a friendly person and that also means that I usually am willing to do something for peace. I'm also in principle willing to show my code, but I've learned that one must never allow a foe (and someone who openly states that his aim is to attack me in a hopefully successful way and his accomplices are to be considered foes) to force their rules upon oneself. So, I don't provide the full source code anymore.
Nope. I disagree because AIO translates to get results faster - but the drive doesn't get faster, it just shortens the time the program wastes on waiting for the IO.
But you are right insofar that many applications can profit from AIO, but for a AM benchmarks there is virtually nothing to gain but in fact some disadvantages, unless one wants to test how many IO requests one can throw at a system before it gets to its knees; but even that brings doubts with it.
For dedi benchmarking though I'm thinking about it as it might make sense.
It's opening a single file for write and read at the same time.
While it's true that you should never let the enemy define the rules of battle, I've also found that unprecedented transparency rarely goes unrewarded. Admittedly, I said rarely because it isn't "never."
Wrong. My benchmark first opens a file for writing and then it (closes it and) opens the same file again for reading.
I wouldn't go as far as saying that transparency needs to be deserved, but IMO it certainly shouldn't be wasted at nasty foes.
In a normal civilized setting though I agree with you and tend to act accordingly.
The strace provided shows the calls occurring simultaneously:
Edit: @stevewatson301 confirms it was clipped, my apologies.
This was just an extract of the two syscalls, @jsg is right in this case (for once!)
The strace was clipped, there may have been a close in between.
Then something is wrong with that quote. Maybe he extracted only the open calls to answer a question (for the flags used) from a longer trace log but my program opens only one file at a time.
Thanks btw for demonstrating that (not only) you don't give a flying f_ck for the truth or the source code. You challenge everything I say but take everything that seems to show me wrong at face value.
These aren't close calls, I should have posted the entire thing to clear up. The full strace is available here: https://paste.ee/p/ncFwr
@stevewatson301 has clarified - it was a clipped quote. I apologise for making an assumption without checking.
Not sure where this is coming from - I haven't mentioned source code here and have apologised twice now for making an assumption and for being wrong.
Here's a hot take:
But honestly who cares. See the crazy results, mentally tune them out.
Again: you don't give a flying f_ck for the truth or the source code. You challenge everything I say but accept everything that seems to show me wrong at face value.
He, your accomplice, had to say that you were wrong. My clarification was totally ignored as was my pseudo code.
What flaw? Tell me about it. I'm really interested in constructive feedback.
Why do you assume he is @stevewatson301 accomplice? I understand you are in defensive mode here but that doesn't mean you have to discourage everyone here with such BS.
I have no idea what you are talking about. I have never conversed with @stevewatson301 beyond public forum interaction, which is minimal if at all, but OK. Yes, he told me I made an incorrect assumption, and when you pointed it out I updated my post with an apology.
I did not read your pseudo code because it's pseudo code, it's meaningless as to how the benchmark works in practice. You're right about one thing though, I don't give a flying fuck about the source code - I never asked for it.
-- deleted --
This was where you quoted @jackb and agreed something screwy is probably happening there @jsg. That's what I'm referring to.
I only discovered his benchmark tool in the Contabo thread a week or so ago, yet somehow I go to the core of some long running anti-jsg conspiracy. 🤷♂️
You still don't understand that you have to go back to school and learn how a disk, SSD, NVMe ... storage ....virtualization or cloud..works . You say that you are testing a virtual disk without realizing that there are actually many details which matters ...
It's easier to ask the provider what disk it has and look at the technical data from the manufacturer if the rest doesn't matter
But as I've said many times when you don't know how it works you don't even know what you're testing ....
what can you learn at least from @stevewatson301 when you take test need to have a "Prerequisites" = the conditions under which you take the test , and if you do comparative tests the conditions must be the same
@all