From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Shaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: lower metadata writeback threshold on low dirty threshold
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 08:31:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120503123145.GO25477@shiny> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120503092528.GA1104@quack.suse.cz>
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 11:25:28AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 03-05-12 11:43:11, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > This helps write performance when setting the dirty threshold to tiny numbers.
> >
> > 3.4.0-rc2 3.4.0-rc2-btrfs4+
> > ------------ ------------------------
> > 96.92 -0.4% 96.54 bay/thresh=1000M/btrfs-100dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > 98.47 +0.0% 98.50 bay/thresh=1000M/btrfs-10dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > 99.38 -0.3% 99.06 bay/thresh=1000M/btrfs-1dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > 98.04 -0.0% 98.02 bay/thresh=100M/btrfs-100dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > 98.68 +0.3% 98.98 bay/thresh=100M/btrfs-10dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > 99.34 -0.0% 99.31 bay/thresh=100M/btrfs-1dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > ==> 88.98 +9.6% 97.53 bay/thresh=10M/btrfs-10dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > ==> 86.99 +13.1% 98.39 bay/thresh=10M/btrfs-1dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > ==> 2.75 +2442.4% 69.88 bay/thresh=1M/btrfs-10dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> > ==> 3.31 +2634.1% 90.54 bay/thresh=1M/btrfs-1dd-1-3.4.0-rc2
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > ---
> > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > --- linux-next.orig/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c 2012-05-02 14:04:00.989262395 +0800
> > +++ linux-next/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c 2012-05-02 14:04:01.773262414 +0800
> > @@ -930,7 +930,8 @@ static int btree_writepages(struct addre
> >
> > /* this is a bit racy, but that's ok */
> > num_dirty = root->fs_info->dirty_metadata_bytes;
> > - if (num_dirty < thresh)
> > + if (num_dirty < min(thresh,
> > + global_dirty_limit << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT-2)))
> > return 0;
> > }
> > return btree_write_cache_pages(mapping, wbc);
> Frankly, that whole condition on WB_SYNC_NONE in btree_writepages() looks
> like a hack. I think we also had problems with this condition when we tried
> to change b_more_io list handling. I found rather terse commit message
> explaining the code:
> Btrfs: Limit btree writeback to prevent seeks
It is definitely a hack ;) The basic point is that once we write a
metadata block, we have to cow it for any future changes. So writing
the metadata has a pretty big impact on performance, and I'd rather
write everything else that is dirty first. When that code was added I
was finding the metadata going to disk very soon under memory pressure.
I'm open to any ideas on this one.
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-03 12:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-08 1:06 [RESEND][PATCH v2] block: remove plugging at buffered write time Wu Fengguang
2012-04-09 14:34 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-04-11 23:13 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-12 1:32 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-04-12 2:20 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-04-12 14:26 ` Jan Kara
2012-04-13 1:40 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-05-03 3:43 ` [PATCH] btrfs: lower metadata writeback threshold on low dirty threshold Fengguang Wu
2012-05-03 3:53 ` [PATCH] writeback: initialize global_dirty_limit Fengguang Wu
2012-05-03 9:25 ` [PATCH] btrfs: lower metadata writeback threshold on low dirty threshold Jan Kara
2012-05-03 10:02 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-05-03 12:31 ` Chris Mason [this message]
2012-05-03 13:30 ` Josef Bacik
2012-05-03 14:08 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-05-06 6:01 ` [RESEND][PATCH v2] block: remove plugging at buffered write time Fengguang Wu
2012-05-06 9:58 ` Fengguang Wu
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=20120503123145.GO25477@shiny \
--to=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@fusionio.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.