From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.jrs-s.net ([173.230.137.22]:56842 "EHLO mail.jrs-s.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751693Ab3KYMzv (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:55:51 -0500 Message-ID: <529348D4.8080105@jrs-s.net> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:55:48 -0500 From: Jim Salter MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Austin S Hemmelgarn , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: btrfs scrub ioprio References: <5292C7F7.8010200@jrs-s.net> <529341B5.8030600@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <529341B5.8030600@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Can you elaborate on this please? I'm not directly familiar with cgroups, I'd greatly appreciate a quick-and-dirty example of using BIO cgroup to limit I/O bandwidth. Limiting bandwidth definitely would ameliorate the problem for me; I already use pv's bw-limiting feature to make btrfs send | btrfs receive tolerable. On 11/25/2013 07:25 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote: > 2. allow the user to set a reasonable I/O bandwidth limit on the scrub > processes (you could already do this with the BIO cgroup, but it would > be nice to not need that to be compiled into the kernel to have this > happen)