From: jay <Jinshan.Xiong@Sun.COM>
To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org
Subject: [Lustre-devel] proposal on implementing a new readahead in clio
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:17:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B5D3769.9040703@sun.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1264324726.11892.76.camel@berloga.shadowland>
Nico and shadow,
Since you have the same question about windows, I just replied them in
one email. Also I got Matt involved - he is a windows expert.
Alexey Lyashkov wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 09:01 +0800, jay wrote:
>
>> Alexey Lyashkov wrote:
>>
>>> We have an idea to spawn a per file readahead thread for each process,
>>> and this thread can be used to issue the readahead RPC async.
>>>
>>> I correctly understand: you suggest a spawn one new thread per open
>>> file?
>>> so if client have 10 processes, and each process is open 100 files, you
>>> need spawn 1000 new threads?
>>>
>>>
>> No, per process readahead, or some system readahead thread pool, this is
>> because most of those threads are sleeping, and it consumes little time
>> to issue readahead requests. The idea behind the scheme is to issue
>> readahead rpcs async.
>>
> first case is same as i say (i think) - 10 processes reading from own
> files, so will be spawn 1000 new threads.
> in second case you will be lost readahead requests on hardloaded client.
>
Nod - that's why I'm not going to do it in linux - as the design doc
said - don't you see section 8.1? :-)
>
>> BTW, I'm not going to implement what you mentioned in linux, because I
>> don't think this is a good idea, as what I said in design doc. However,
>> we HAVE to have an async thread pool to implement readahead for windows.
>> Windows doesn't have an interface of issuing async read request, lack of
>> a mechanism to have page lock or similar things - what a pity!
>>
> hm.. looks i don't understand problem. Currently linux client is using
> ->readpage() to generate OST_READ RPC and sending via ptlrpcd-io.
> Why isn't generate this RPC directly for Windows? Or you mean about
> update asynchronous update VM cache ?
>
The problem is that we have to wait for the RPC(which may just contain
readahead pages) to be finished before we can return to user space. You
may ask why we can't do this, the answer is that we should pipeline the
readahead request, instead of reading a chunk of data to support readahead.
The problem of windows is that it's lack of interfaces to manipulate
pages. I'm not a windows expert - please ask matt if you have windows
specific questions.
>
>
--
Good good study, day day up
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-25 6:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-20 12:37 [Lustre-devel] proposal on implementing a new readahead in clio jay
2010-01-22 10:53 ` jay
2010-01-23 7:09 ` Alexey Lyashkov
2010-01-24 1:01 ` jay
2010-01-24 9:18 ` Alexey Lyashkov
2010-01-25 6:17 ` jay [this message]
2010-01-25 4:05 ` Nicolas Williams
2010-01-25 6:55 ` Matt Wu
2010-01-25 7:23 ` Andreas Dilger
2010-01-25 15:34 ` Nicolas Williams
2010-01-26 10:02 ` Alex Zhuravlev
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=4B5D3769.9040703@sun.com \
--to=jinshan.xiong@sun.com \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.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.