Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
The I/O schedulers don't issue the physical I/Os immediately.
The are delayed, sorted (by block), and queued. That way multiple blocks (from multiple issued I/Os) that are "close" will be transferred together. There are various schemes to (attempt) to ensure no process gets blocked or starved - hence the existence of multiple I/O schedulers that you can choose to use.
If you say that it IO scheduler and the Physical IO are not happening at the same time, then how long show I wait? Because I've been monitoring the box for half an hour, and %iowait still shows the box being at 10% only.
I don't understand what you are asking.
The scheduler(s) manage the I/O for you, delaying the physical I/O variously from some few milliseconds to a few seconds. You shouldn't be able to discern this in a normal environment with mixed I/O and CPU consumption.
I'm just confused because I know there is a lot of activity based on result of iostat (unless I am not interpreting the result of iostat correctly) but somehow top does not show any activity in %iowait.
What you are seeing looking at is "activity" from the application(s) point of view. Those I/Os get buffered up and issued at the discretion of various components - chiefly the scheduler. This optimises the usage of the disk - things like head movement. As you've noticed, this (usually) works a treat.
Developers (and users) being protected from themselves ....
Distribution: Red Hat, Ubuntu, PCLinuxOS, Fedora, Vector Linux, CentOS, HP-UX, Solaris, AIX, FreeBSD
Originally Posted by bichonfrise74
Iostat shows that the Blk_read/s and Blk_wrtn/s is around 500 blocks / seconds and yet the %iowait is at 10% only.
Shouldn't the %iowait being huge if there is constant reading and writing to the disk???
These questions are easier to answer if you've got some sort of baseline to compare it to. I've got some Oracle servers that normally run about 10 times that much I/O. But I know that's normal, so it's OK. Big iron hardware, EMC Symmetrix disk array. On my desktop system, 500 blocks/sec would be unusual, and I'd expect the SATA drive to be a bottleneck.