From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jaxboe@fusionio.com,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, andrea@betterlinux.com,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: fsync serialization on ext4 with blkio throttling (Was: Re: [PATCH 0/8][V2] blk-throttle: Throttle buffered WRITEs in balance_dirty_pages())
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:04:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110630200459.GI27889@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110629015336.GA19082@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 09:53:36PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
[..]
> > FYI, filesystem development cycles are slow and engineers are
> > conservative because of the absolute requirement for data integrity.
> > Hence we tend to focus development on problems that users are
> > reporting (i.e. known pain points) or functionality they have
> > requested.
> >
> > In this case, block throttling works OK on most filesystems out of
> > the box, but it has some known problems. If there are people out
> > there hitting these known problems then they'll report them, we'll
> > hear about them and they'll eventually get fixed.
> >
> > However, if no-one is reporting problems related to block throttling
> > then it either works well enough for the existing user base or
> > nobody is using the functionality. Either way we don't need to spend
> > time on optimising the filesystem for such functionality.
> >
> > So while you may be skeptical about whether filesystems will be
> > changed, it really comes down to behaviour in real-world
> > deployments. If what we already have is good enough, then we don't
> > need to spend resources on fixing problems no-one is seeing...
>
[CC linux-ext4 list]
Dave,
Just another example where serialization is taking place with ext4.
I created a group with 1MB/s write limit and ran tedso's fsync tester
program with little modification. I used write() system call instead
of pwrite() so that file size grows. This program basically writes
1MB of data and then fsync's it and then measures the fsync time.
I ran two instances of prgram in two groups on two separate files. One
instances is throttled to 1MB/s and other is in root group unthrottled.
Unthrottled program gets serialized behind throttled one. Following
are fsync times.
Throttled instance Unthrottled Instance
------------------ --------------------
fsync time: 1.0051 fsync time: 1.0067
fsync time: 1.0049 fsync time: 1.0075
fsync time: 1.0048 fsync time: 1.0063
fsync time: 1.0073 fsync time: 1.0062
fsync time: 1.0070 fsync time: 1.0078
fsync time: 1.0032 fsync time: 1.0049
fsync time: 0.0154 fsync time: 1.0068
fsync time: 0.0137 fsync time: 1.0048
Without any throttling both the instances do fine
-------------------------------------------------
Throttled instance Unthrottled Instance
------------------ --------------------
fsync time: 0.0139 fsync time: 0.0162
fsync time: 0.0132 fsync time: 0.0156
fsync time: 0.0149 fsync time: 0.0169
fsync time: 0.0165 fsync time: 0.0152
fsync time: 0.0188 fsync time: 0.0135
fsync time: 0.0137 fsync time: 0.0142
fsync time: 0.0148 fsync time: 0.0149
fsync time: 0.0168 fsync time: 0.0163
fsync time: 0.0153 fsync time: 0.0143
So when we are inreasing the size of file and fsyncing it, other
unthrottled instances of similar activities will get throttled
behind it.
IMHO, this is a problem and should be fixed. If filesystem can fix it great.
But if not, then we should consider the option of throttling buffered writes
in balance_dirty_pages().
Following is the test program.
/*
* * fsync-tester.c
*
* Written by Theodore Ts'o, 3/21/09.
*
* This file may be redistributed under the terms of the GNU Public
* License, version 2.
*/
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <time.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <string.h>
#define SIZE (1024*1024)
static float timeval_subtract(struct timeval *tv1, struct timeval *tv2)
{
return ((tv1->tv_sec - tv2->tv_sec) +
((float) (tv1->tv_usec - tv2->tv_usec)) / 1000000);
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int fd;
struct timeval tv, tv2;
char buf[SIZE];
fd = open("fsync-tester.tst-file", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT);
if (fd < 0) {
perror("open");
exit(1);
}
memset(buf, 'a', SIZE);
while (1) {
write(fd, buf, SIZE);
gettimeofday(&tv, NULL);
fsync(fd);
gettimeofday(&tv2, NULL);
printf("fsync time: %5.4f\n", timeval_subtract(&tv2,
&tv));
sleep(1);
}
}
Thanks
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-30 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-28 15:35 [PATCH 0/8][V2] blk-throttle: Throttle buffered WRITEs in balance_dirty_pages() Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 15:35 ` [PATCH 1/8] blk-throttle: convert wait routines to return jiffies to wait Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 15:35 ` [PATCH 2/8] blk-throttle: do not enforce first queued bio check in tg_wait_dispatch Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 15:35 ` [PATCH 3/8] blk-throttle: use io size and direction as parameters to wait routines Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 15:35 ` [PATCH 4/8] blk-throttle: specify number of ios during dispatch update Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 15:35 ` [PATCH 5/8] blk-throttle: get rid of extend slice trace message Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 15:35 ` [PATCH 6/8] blk-throttle: core logic to throttle task while dirtying pages Vivek Goyal
2011-06-29 9:30 ` Andrea Righi
2011-06-29 15:25 ` Andrea Righi
2011-06-29 20:03 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 15:35 ` [PATCH 7/8] blk-throttle: do not throttle writes at device level except direct io Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 15:35 ` [PATCH 8/8] blk-throttle: enable throttling of task while dirtying pages Vivek Goyal
2011-06-30 14:52 ` Andrea Righi
2011-06-30 15:06 ` Andrea Righi
2011-06-30 17:14 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-30 21:22 ` Andrea Righi
2011-06-28 16:21 ` [PATCH 0/8][V2] blk-throttle: Throttle buffered WRITEs in balance_dirty_pages() Andrea Righi
2011-06-28 17:06 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-28 17:39 ` Andrea Righi
2011-06-29 16:05 ` Andrea Righi
2011-06-29 20:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-29 0:42 ` Dave Chinner
2011-06-29 1:53 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-30 20:04 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2011-06-30 20:44 ` fsync serialization on ext4 with blkio throttling (Was: Re: [PATCH 0/8][V2] blk-throttle: Throttle buffered WRITEs in balance_dirty_pages()) Vivek Goyal
2011-07-01 0:16 ` 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=20110630200459.GI27889@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=andrea@betterlinux.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.