All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"richard@rsk.demon.co.uk" <richard@rsk.demon.co.uk>,
	"jens.axboe@oracle.com" <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: regression in page writeback
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:26:20 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091002172620.GB8161@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091002081953.GA14529@localhost>

On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 04:19:53PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > The big writes, if they are contiguous, could take 1-2 seconds
> > > on a very slow, ancient laptop disk, and that will hold up any kind of 
> > > small synchornous activities --- such as either a disk read or a firefox-
> > > triggered fsync().
> > 
> > Yes, that's a problem. The SYNC/ASYNC elevator queues can help here.

The SYNC/ASYNC queues will partially help, up to the whatever the
largest I/O that can issued as a single chunk times the queue depth
for those disks that support NCQ. 

> > There's still the problem of IO submission time != IO completion time,
> > due to fluctuations of randomness and more. However that's a general
> > and unavoidable problem.  Both the wbc.timeout scheme and the
> > "wbc.nr_to_write based on estimated throughput" scheme are based on
> > _past_ requests and it's simply impossible to have a 100% accurate
> > scheme. In principle, wbc.timeout will only be inferior at IO startup
> > time. In the steady state of 100% full queue, it is actually estimating
> > the IO throughput implicitly :)
> 
> Another difference between wbc.timeout and adaptive wbc.nr_to_write
> is, when there comes many _read_ requests or fsync, these SYNC rw
> requests will significant lower the ASYNC writeback throughput, if
> it's not completely stalled. So with timeout, the inode will be
> aborted with few pages written; with nr_to_write, the inode will be
> written a good number of pages, at the cost of taking up long time.
> 
> IMHO the nr_to_write behavior seems more efficient. What do you think?

I agree, adaptively changing nr_to_write seems like the right thing to
do.  For bonus points, we could also monitor how often synchronous I/O
operations are happening, allow nr_to_write to go up by some amount if
there aren't many synchronous operations happening at the moment.  So
that might be another opportunity to do auto-tuning, although this
might be a hueristic that might need to be configurable for certain
specialized workloads.  For many other workloads, the it should be
possible to detect regular pattern of reads and/or synchronous writes,
and if so, use a lower nr_to_write versus if there isn't many
synchronous I/O operations happening on that particular block device.

	    		   	     	     - Ted

  reply	other threads:[~2009-10-02 17:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 79+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-09-22  5:49 regression in page writeback Shaohua Li
2009-09-22  6:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-22  8:05   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-22  8:09     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-22  8:24       ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-22  8:32         ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-22  8:51           ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-22  8:52           ` Richard Kennedy
2009-09-22  9:05             ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-22 11:41               ` Shaohua Li
2009-09-22 15:52           ` Chris Mason
2009-09-23  0:22             ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  0:54               ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-23  1:17                 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  1:27                   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  1:28                   ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-23  1:32                     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  1:47                       ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-23  2:01                         ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  2:09                           ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-23  3:07                             ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  1:45                     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  1:59                       ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-23  2:26                         ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  2:36                           ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-23  2:49                             ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  2:56                               ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-23  3:11                                 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  3:10                               ` Shaohua Li
2009-09-23  3:14                                 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  3:25                                   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23 14:00                             ` Chris Mason
2009-09-24  3:15                               ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-24 12:10                                 ` Chris Mason
2009-09-25  3:26                                   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-25  0:11                                 ` Dave Chinner
2009-09-25  0:38                                   ` Chris Mason
2009-09-25  5:04                                     ` Dave Chinner
2009-09-25  6:45                                       ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-28  1:07                                         ` Dave Chinner
2009-09-28  7:15                                           ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-28 13:08                                             ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-09-28 14:07                                               ` Theodore Tso
2009-09-30  5:26                                                 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-30  5:32                                                   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-10-01 22:17                                                     ` Jan Kara
2009-10-02  3:27                                                       ` Wu Fengguang
2009-10-06 12:55                                                         ` Jan Kara
2009-10-06 13:18                                                           ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-30 14:11                                                   ` Theodore Tso
2009-10-01 15:14                                                     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-10-01 21:54                                                       ` Theodore Tso
2009-10-02  2:55                                                         ` Wu Fengguang
2009-10-02  8:19                                                           ` Wu Fengguang
2009-10-02 17:26                                                             ` Theodore Tso [this message]
2009-10-03  6:10                                                               ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-29  2:32                                               ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-29 14:00                                                 ` Chris Mason
2009-09-29 14:21                                                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-09-29  0:15                                             ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-28 14:25                                           ` Chris Mason
2009-09-29 23:39                                             ` Dave Chinner
2009-09-30  1:30                                               ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-25 12:06                                       ` Chris Mason
2009-09-25  3:19                                   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-26  1:47                                     ` Dave Chinner
2009-09-26  3:02                                       ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-26  3:02                                         ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  9:19                         ` Richard Kennedy
2009-09-23  9:23                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-23  9:37                             ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23 10:30                               ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  6:41             ` Shaohua Li
2009-09-22 10:49 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-22 11:50   ` Shaohua Li
2009-09-22 13:39     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-23  1:52       ` Shaohua Li
2009-09-23  4:00         ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-25  6:14           ` Wu Fengguang

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=20091002172620.GB8161@mit.edu \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=richard@rsk.demon.co.uk \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.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.