From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: gus3 <musicman529@yahoo.com>
Cc: Szabolcs Szakacsits <szaka@ntfs-3g.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS vs Elevators (was Re: [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:14:43 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080821061443.GD5706@disturbed> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <684252.68814.qm@web34508.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:00:07PM -0700, gus3 wrote:
> --- On Wed, 8/20/08, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
>
> > Ok, I thought it might be the tiny log, but it didn't improve
> > anything here when increased the log size, or the log buffer
> > size.
> >
> > Looking at the block trace, I think elevator merging is somewhat
> > busted. I'm seeing adjacent I/Os being dispatched without having
> > been merged. e.g:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Also, CFQ appears to not be merging WRITE_SYNC bios or issuing
> > them with any urgency. The result of this is that it stalls the
> > XFS transaction subsystem by capturing all the log buffers in
> > the elevator and not issuing them. e.g.:
>
> [snip]
>
> > The I/Os are merged, but there's still that 700ms delay before
> > dispatch. i was looking at this a while back but didn't get to
> > finishing it off. i.e.:
> >
> > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2008-01/msg00151.html
> > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2008-01/msg00152.html
> >
> > I'll have a bit more of a look at this w.r.t to compilebench
> > performance, because it seems like a similar set of problems
> > that I was seeing back then...
>
> I concur your observation, esp. w.r.t. XFS and CFQ clashing:
>
> http://gus3.typepad.com/i_am_therefore_i_think/2008/07/finding-the-fas.html
>
> CFQ is the default on most Linux systems AFAIK; for decent XFS
> performance one needs to switch to "noop" or "deadline". I wasn't
> sure if it was broken code, or simply base assumptions in conflict
> (XFS vs. CFQ). Your log output sheds light on the matter for me,
> thanks.
I'm wondering if these elevators are just getting too smart for
their own good. w.r.t to the above test, deadline was about twice
as slow as CFQ - it does immediate dispatch on SYNC_WRITE bios and
so caused more seeks that CFQ and hence went slower. noop had
similar dispatch latency problems to CFQ, so it wasn't any
faster either.
I think that we need to issue explicit unplugs to get the log I/O
dispatched the way we want on all elevators and stop trying to
give elevators implicit hints by abusing the bio types and hoping
they do the right thing....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-21 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-20 2:45 [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-20 7:43 ` Andrew Morton
2008-08-20 8:22 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-20 18:47 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-20 16:13 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-20 21:25 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-20 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2008-08-20 21:48 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-21 2:12 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 2:46 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-21 5:15 ` XFS vs Elevators (was Re: [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system) Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 6:00 ` gus3
2008-08-21 6:14 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2008-08-21 7:00 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-21 8:53 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 9:33 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-21 17:08 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 17:08 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-22 2:29 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-22 2:29 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-25 1:59 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-25 4:32 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-25 12:01 ` Jamie Lokier
2008-08-25 12:01 ` Jamie Lokier
2008-08-26 3:07 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-26 3:50 ` david
2008-08-27 1:20 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-27 21:54 ` david
2008-08-28 1:08 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 14:52 ` Chris Mason
2008-08-21 14:52 ` Chris Mason
2008-08-21 6:04 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 8:07 ` Aaron Carroll
2008-08-21 8:25 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 11:02 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-08-21 15:00 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-08-21 15:00 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-08-21 17:10 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-21 17:33 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-22 2:24 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-22 6:49 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-08-22 6:49 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-08-22 12:44 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-23 12:52 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-21 11:53 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-08-21 15:56 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 12:51 ` [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system Chris Mason
2008-08-26 10:16 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-26 16:54 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-27 18:13 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-27 18:13 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-27 18:19 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-27 18:19 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-29 6:29 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-29 8:40 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-08-29 10:51 ` konishi.ryusuke
2008-08-29 11:04 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-29 10:45 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-29 10:45 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-29 16:37 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-29 16:37 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-29 19:16 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-29 19:16 ` Jörn Engel
2008-09-01 12:25 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-09-01 12:25 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-20 9:47 ` Andi Kleen
2008-08-21 4:57 ` Ryusuke Konishi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-08-21 11:05 XFS vs Elevators (was Re: [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system) Martin Knoblauch
2008-08-21 11:05 ` Martin Knoblauch
2008-08-21 15:59 ` Dave Chinner
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=20080821061443.GD5706@disturbed \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=musicman529@yahoo.com \
--cc=szaka@ntfs-3g.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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.