From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gui Jianfeng Subject: Re: [RFC] IO scheduler based IO controller V6 Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:36:51 +0800 Message-ID: <4A6E7253.9050906@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <1246564917-19603-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> <4A6D0C9A.3080600@cn.fujitsu.com> <20090727125503.GA24449@redhat.com> <20090728032712.GC3620@redhat.com> Reply-To: device-mapper development Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090728032712.GC3620@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com To: Vivek Goyal Cc: dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, snitzer@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, dpshah@google.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com, agk@redhat.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp, mikew@google.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, nauman@google.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jbaron@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, righi.andrea@gmail.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: dm-devel.ids Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 08:55:03AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 10:10:34AM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote: >>> Hi=EF=BC=8C >>> >>> Here are some fio test results for IO Controller V6 built and not bui= lt. >>> Iozone test results are also attached. >>> >> Hi Gui, >> >> Thanks a lot for some performance numbers. It seems to be a mixed char= t. >> Performance gains at some places and loss at others. I am curious abou= t >> that -7.0% for normal writes. Not sure what can contribute to that. >> >=20 > Gui, can you also try with CONFIG_TRACK_ASYNC_CONTEXT=3Dn and see if it= improves > buffered write performance. Hi Vivek, Ok, I'll do it, and i'll do the performance test for IO Controller V7, = and post the results as soon as i get them. >=20 > Thanks > Vivek >=20 >> What was the value of "fairness" parameter when you ran those tests? C= an you >> please set fairness =3D 0 and re-run the tests (if you have already no= t done so). >> >> By default fairness is set to 1 in V6. With fairness =3D 0, we should = be very >> close to existing CFQ behavior. If not, then we need to dive deeper an= d >> see why variations are happening. >> >> Is it also possible to run the same tests with V7.=20 >> >> Thanks >> Vivek >> >>> Arch: X86 >>> Mem: 1G >>> Disk: 320G >>> IO Scheduler: CFQ >>> >>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>> By normal read and write syscall. >>> >>> Block Size:32K >>> File Size: 1G * 10 >>> >>> Mode Normal read | Random read | Normal wr= ite | Random write | Direct read | Direct write >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1 47,932KiB/s 3,566KiB/s 45,693KiB= /s 8,501KiB/s 50,088KiB/s 43,473KiB/s >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1-Vivek-V6 47,231KiB/s 3,411KiB/s 42,451KiB= /s 8,714KiB/s 51,284KiB/s 42,341KiB/s >>> >>> Performance -1.5% -4.4% -7.0% = +2.5% +2.4% -2.6% >>> >>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>> >>> By mmap. >>> >>> Block Size:32K >>> File Size: 500M >>> >>> Mode Normal read | Random read | Normal wr= ite | Random write >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1 49,951KiB/s 3,245KiB/s 21,950KiB= /s 2,771KiB/s >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1-Vivek-V6 49,951KiB/s 3,154KiB/s 22,593KiB= /s 2,648KiB/s >>> >>> Performance 0% -2.8% +2.9% = -4.4% >>> >>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>> =20 >>> By libaio calls >>> >>> Block Size:32K >>> File Size: 500M >>> >>> Mode Normal read | Random read | Normal wri= te | Random write >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1 49,447KiB/s 3,296KiB/s 57,519KiB= /s 21,093KiB/s >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1-Vivek-V6 50,142KiB/s 3,238KiB/s 57,791KiB= /s 21,283KiB/s >>> >>> Performance +1.4% -1.8% 0% = +0.1% >>> >>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >=20 >=20 >=20 --=20 Regards Gui Jianfeng From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751850AbZG1DiQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:38:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751137AbZG1DiP (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:38:15 -0400 Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:64438 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750833AbZG1DiP (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:38:15 -0400 Message-ID: <4A6E7253.9050906@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:36:51 +0800 From: Gui Jianfeng User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (Windows/20070716) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vivek Goyal CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com, nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, ryov@valinux.co.jp, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, jmoyer@redhat.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, righi.andrea@gmail.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, jbaron@redhat.com, agk@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC] IO scheduler based IO controller V6 References: <1246564917-19603-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> <4A6D0C9A.3080600@cn.fujitsu.com> <20090727125503.GA24449@redhat.com> <20090728032712.GC3620@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20090728032712.GC3620@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 08:55:03AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 10:10:34AM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote: >>> Hi， >>> >>> Here are some fio test results for IO Controller V6 built and not built. >>> Iozone test results are also attached. >>> >> Hi Gui, >> >> Thanks a lot for some performance numbers. It seems to be a mixed chart. >> Performance gains at some places and loss at others. I am curious about >> that -7.0% for normal writes. Not sure what can contribute to that. >> > > Gui, can you also try with CONFIG_TRACK_ASYNC_CONTEXT=n and see if it improves > buffered write performance. Hi Vivek, Ok, I'll do it, and i'll do the performance test for IO Controller V7, and post the results as soon as i get them. > > Thanks > Vivek > >> What was the value of "fairness" parameter when you ran those tests? Can you >> please set fairness = 0 and re-run the tests (if you have already not done so). >> >> By default fairness is set to 1 in V6. With fairness = 0, we should be very >> close to existing CFQ behavior. If not, then we need to dive deeper and >> see why variations are happening. >> >> Is it also possible to run the same tests with V7. >> >> Thanks >> Vivek >> >>> Arch: X86 >>> Mem: 1G >>> Disk: 320G >>> IO Scheduler: CFQ >>> >>> ============ >>> By normal read and write syscall. >>> >>> Block Size:32K >>> File Size: 1G * 10 >>> >>> Mode Normal read | Random read | Normal write | Random write | Direct read | Direct write >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1 47,932KiB/s 3,566KiB/s 45,693KiB/s 8,501KiB/s 50,088KiB/s 43,473KiB/s >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1-Vivek-V6 47,231KiB/s 3,411KiB/s 42,451KiB/s 8,714KiB/s 51,284KiB/s 42,341KiB/s >>> >>> Performance -1.5% -4.4% -7.0% +2.5% +2.4% -2.6% >>> >>> ============ >>> >>> By mmap. >>> >>> Block Size:32K >>> File Size: 500M >>> >>> Mode Normal read | Random read | Normal write | Random write >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1 49,951KiB/s 3,245KiB/s 21,950KiB/s 2,771KiB/s >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1-Vivek-V6 49,951KiB/s 3,154KiB/s 22,593KiB/s 2,648KiB/s >>> >>> Performance 0% -2.8% +2.9% -4.4% >>> >>> ============ >>> >>> By libaio calls >>> >>> Block Size:32K >>> File Size: 500M >>> >>> Mode Normal read | Random read | Normal write | Random write >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1 49,447KiB/s 3,296KiB/s 57,519KiB/s 21,093KiB/s >>> >>> 2.6.31-rc1-Vivek-V6 50,142KiB/s 3,238KiB/s 57,791KiB/s 21,283KiB/s >>> >>> Performance +1.4% -1.8% 0% +0.1% >>> >>> ============ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- Regards Gui Jianfeng