From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, tytso@mit.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 19:01:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090406170116.GH5178@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904060840080.3863@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, Apr 06 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >
> > > Jens - I can just apply this queue (I want to test it out anyway), or if
> > > you prefer I can pull from you. Just tell me.
> >
> > Whatever you want, if you want to pull instead of manually applying,
> > it's:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.dk/linux-2.6-block.git blk-latency
>
> Ok, I applied them for testing anyway, so I think I'll just keep the
> series I have in my tree. I'm keeping my nasty "dd+sync" going in the
No problem, the end result should be identical :-)
> background, just to verify that things really feel better, but I'm already
> convinced this is a winner. Especially with the request size limiter, I
> can really read email _almost_ as if nothing else was going on on the
> machine.
>
> With that request size limiting, my fsync pauses tend to be in the 250ms
> range, with a one 0.75s outlier in the last few minutes. I can definitely
> feel that quarter-second thing, and the .75s pause was a real stutter, but
> boy what a difference. I don't get the uncontrollable urge to kill that
> nasty background writer any more.
If we can make the dd writer almost unnoticable, then I think we've come
a long way already. That really is a nasty workload.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-06 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-06 12:48 [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 1/8] block: change the request allocation/congestion logic to be sync/async based Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 2/8] Add WRITE_SYNC_PLUG and SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 3/8] block: fsync_buffers_list() should use SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 4/8] jbd: use WRITE_SYNC_PLUG instead of WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 5/8] jbd2: " Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 6/8] block: enabling plugging on SSD devices that don't do queuing Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 7/8] block: Add flag for telling the IO schedulers NOT to anticipate more IO Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 8/8] block: switch sync_dirty_buffer() over to WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:04 ` [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:13 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 16:57 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-07 3:28 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-06 15:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 15:10 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 17:01 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-04-06 18:31 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:26 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 20:12 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:19 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 21:35 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:04 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 23:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 7:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2009-04-07 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-07 14:10 ` Diego Calleja
2009-04-08 12:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-08 12:56 ` Denys Vlasenko
2009-04-08 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-07 13:35 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 14:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 19:24 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 19:45 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-04-07 20:53 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-04-09 2:40 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-04-09 14:01 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-04-06 22:25 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:48 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:52 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 23:19 ` Alan Cox
2009-04-07 3:52 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-07 4:13 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 4:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 4:48 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 5:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 5:23 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-07 6:27 ` Trenton D. Adams
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=20090406170116.GH5178@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.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.