From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: James Smart <James.Smart@Emulex.Com>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
SCSI development list <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Problems with the block-layer timeouts
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 18:23:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081103172350.GV31673@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <490F0822.6010406@emulex.com>
On Mon, Nov 03 2008, James Smart wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>While I'm on the subject, there are a few related items that could be
> >>improved. In my tests, I was generating I/O requests simply by doing
> >>
> >> dd if=/dev/sda ...
> >>
> >>I don't know where the timeouts for these requests are determined, but
> >>they were set to 60 seconds. That seems much too long.
> >
> >Fully agreed, as Mike mentioned this actually looks like a dumb udev
> >rule that didn't have any effect until this generic timeout work. For
> >normal IO, something in the 10 second range is a lot more appropriate.
>
> Yes and no. For direct-attach storage with no other initiators, ok.
> But for larger arrays, potentially with multiple initiators - no. I
> can name several arrays that depend on a 30 second timeout, and a few
> that, underload, require 60 seconds. I assume that there's usually
> "best practices" guides for the integrators to ensure the defaults are
> set right.
Sure I agree, it depends on what kind of storage you have. What I mean
is that for a normal disk you want something like 10 seconds.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-03 17:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-01 16:54 Problems with the block-layer timeouts Alan Stern
2008-11-02 20:35 ` Mike Anderson
2008-11-03 8:52 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-03 14:18 ` James Smart
2008-11-03 17:23 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2008-11-03 15:59 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-03 16:39 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-03 17:07 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-03 17:27 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-04 3:01 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-06 0:01 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-06 7:23 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-07 4:05 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-07 11:24 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11 6:54 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-11 17:11 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-11 17:11 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-11 19:19 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-12 2:08 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-13 10:34 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-17 3:48 ` FUJITA Tomonori
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=20081103172350.GV31673@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=James.Smart@Emulex.Com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/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.