From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Martin Peschke <mp3@de.ibm.com>
Cc: psusi@cfl.rr.com, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/5] I/O statistics through request queues
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:11:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061026191154.GG4978@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4540D61B.5040802@de.ibm.com>
HI -
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 05:36:59PM +0200, Martin Peschke wrote:
> [...] I meant scaling with regard to lots of different keys. This
> is what you have described as "By 'rows'", isn't it?
Yes.
> For example, if I wanted to store a timestamp for each request
> issued, and there were lots of devices and the I/O was driving the
> system crazy - how would affect that lookup time?
If you have only hundreds or thousands of such requests on the go
at any given time, that's not a problem. Hash by pointer.
> [...] I would be done with that lookup table entry then. But it
> won't go away, will it? Is this an issue?
The entry can be instantly cleared for reuse by another future
key-value pair. Think of it like a mini slab cache.
> [...] Anyway, I think this discussion shows that any dynamically
> added client of kernel markers which needs to hold extra data for
> entities like requests might be difficult to be implemented
> efficiently (compared to static instrumentation), because markers,
> by nature, only allow for code additions, but not for additions to
> existing data structures.
It's a question that mixes quantitative and policy matters. It's
certainly *somewhat* slower to store data on the side, but whether in
the context of the event source that is okay or not Just Depends. On
the flip side, patching in hard-coded extra data storage for busy
structures also has a cost if the statistics gathering is not actually
requested by the end-user. (On the policy side, one must weigh to
what extent it's reasonable to pad more and more data structures, just
in case.)
- FChE
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-26 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-21 12:57 [Patch 0/5] I/O statistics through request queues Martin Peschke
2006-10-23 11:37 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-23 18:11 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-23 20:02 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-24 16:02 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-24 16:20 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-24 20:38 ` Phillip Susi
2006-10-24 22:27 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-25 17:50 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-10-26 11:07 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-26 12:13 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-10-26 13:37 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-26 14:02 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-10-26 15:36 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-26 19:11 ` Frank Ch. Eigler [this message]
2006-10-24 23:04 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-25 5:12 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-25 10:32 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-25 10:42 ` Jens Axboe
2006-11-02 14:39 ` martin
2006-11-02 14:46 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-23 18:39 ` Phillip Susi
2006-10-24 16:05 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-24 20:44 ` Phillip Susi
2006-10-24 22:49 ` Martin Peschke
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061026191154.GG4978@redhat.com \
--to=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mp3@de.ibm.com \
--cc=psusi@cfl.rr.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.