From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: "Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
"linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: ext4 data=writeback performs worse than data=ordered now
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:02:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111215050233.GA8959@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111215122759.7ce0b7b5@notabene.brown>
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 09:27:59AM +0800, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:00:10 +0800 Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > I found sometimes one disk hasn't any request inflight, but we can't
> > > send request to the disk, because the scsi host's resource (the queue
> > > depth) is used out, looks we send too many requests from other disks and
> > > leave some disks starved. The resource imbalance in scsi isn't a new
> > > problem, even 3.1 has such issue, so I'd think writeback introduces new
> > > imbalance between the 12 disks. In fact, if I limit disk's queue depth
> > > to 10, in this way the 12 disks will not impact each other in scsi
> > > layer, the performance regression fully disappears for both writeback
> > > and order mode.
> >
> > I observe similar issue in MD. The default
> >
> > q->nr_requests = BLKDEV_MAX_RQ;
> >
> > is too small for large arrays, and I end up doing
> >
> > echo 1280 > /sys/block/md0/queue/nr_requests
> >
> > in my tests.
>
> And you find this makes a difference?
>
> That is very surprising because md devices don't use requests (and really use
> the 'queue' at all) and definitely don't make use of nr_requests.
Yes it is: /sys/block/md0/queue/nr_requests cannot be modified at all...
Sorry for the noise!
Fengguang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-15 5:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-14 13:34 ext4 data=writeback performs worse than data=ordered now Wu Fengguang
[not found] ` <20111214140025.GA19650@localhost>
2011-12-14 14:03 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-12-14 14:30 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-12-14 14:49 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-12-14 14:52 ` Tao Ma
2011-12-14 15:02 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-12-15 1:02 ` Shaohua Li
2011-12-15 1:00 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-12-15 1:27 ` NeilBrown
2011-12-15 1:34 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-12-15 5:02 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2011-12-15 1:20 ` Darrick J. Wong
2011-12-15 1:42 ` Shaohua Li
2011-12-15 18:10 ` Darrick J. Wong
2011-12-16 1:47 ` Shaohua Li
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=20111215050233.GA8959@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--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.