All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leroy van Logchem <leroy.vanlogchem@wldelft.nl>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: huge improvement with per-device dirty throttling
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:37:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <46DD2760.3040505@wldelft.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070822124736.GQ13915@v2.random>

Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 01:05:13PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Ok perhaps the new adaptive dirty limits helps your single disk
>> a lot too. But your improvements seem to be more "collateral damage" @)
>>
>> But if that was true it might be enough to just change the dirty limits
>> to get the same effect on your system. You might want to play with
>> /proc/sys/vm/dirty_*
> 
> The adaptive dirty limit is per task so it can't be reproduced with
> global sysctl. It made quite some difference when I researched into it
> in function of time. This isn't in function of time but it certainly
> makes a lot of difference too, actually it's the most important part
> of the patchset for most people, the rest is for the corner cases that
> aren't handled right currently (writing to a slow device with
> writeback cache has always been hanging the whole thing).


Self-tuning > static sysctl's. The last years we needed to use very 
small values for dirty_ratio and dirty_background_ratio to soften the 
latency problems we have during sustained writes. Imo these patches 
really help in many cases, please commit to mainline.

-- 
Leroy


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Leroy van Logchem <leroy.vanlogchem@wldelft.nl>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	"Jeffrey W. Baker" <jwbaker@acm.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: huge improvement with per-device dirty throttling
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:37:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <46DD2760.3040505@wldelft.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070822124736.GQ13915@v2.random>

Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 01:05:13PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Ok perhaps the new adaptive dirty limits helps your single disk
>> a lot too. But your improvements seem to be more "collateral damage" @)
>>
>> But if that was true it might be enough to just change the dirty limits
>> to get the same effect on your system. You might want to play with
>> /proc/sys/vm/dirty_*
> 
> The adaptive dirty limit is per task so it can't be reproduced with
> global sysctl. It made quite some difference when I researched into it
> in function of time. This isn't in function of time but it certainly
> makes a lot of difference too, actually it's the most important part
> of the patchset for most people, the rest is for the corner cases that
> aren't handled right currently (writing to a slow device with
> writeback cache has always been hanging the whole thing).


Self-tuning > static sysctl's. The last years we needed to use very 
small values for dirty_ratio and dirty_background_ratio to soften the 
latency problems we have during sustained writes. Imo these patches 
really help in many cases, please commit to mainline.

-- 
Leroy

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2007-09-04  9:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-08-22  6:37 huge improvement with per-device dirty throttling Jeffrey W. Baker
2007-08-22  6:37 ` Jeffrey W. Baker
2007-08-22 11:05 ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-22 11:05   ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-22 11:09   ` Paolo Ornati
2007-08-22 11:09     ` Paolo Ornati
2007-08-22 12:47   ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-08-22 12:47     ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-09-04  9:37     ` Leroy van Logchem [this message]
2007-09-04  9:37       ` Leroy van Logchem
2007-09-04 19:23       ` Martin Knoblauch
2007-09-04 19:23         ` Martin Knoblauch
2007-09-06  9:50         ` Martin Knoblauch
2007-09-06  9:50           ` Martin Knoblauch
2007-09-05  8:54     ` Martin Knoblauch
2007-09-05  8:54       ` Martin Knoblauch
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-08-22 11:31 Al Boldi

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=46DD2760.3040505@wldelft.nl \
    --to=leroy.vanlogchem@wldelft.nl \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.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.