From: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>
To: Guan Junxiong <guanjunxiong@huawei.com>,
Christophe Varoqui <christophe.varoqui@opensvc.com>
Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, niuhaoxin <niuhaoxin@huawei.com>,
"Shenhong (C)" <shenhong09@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] libmultipath: path latency: simplify getprio()
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 16:56:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1512662201.3207.25.camel@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19c4c292-3297-b602-36c4-0dde2c61e266@huawei.com>
On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 12:26 +0800, Guan Junxiong wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> I have tested this patch and found something needed to be correct. My
> comments inline.
>
>
> > @@ -340,8 +323,14 @@ int getprio(struct path *pp, char *args,
> > unsigned int timeout)
> > ".It is recommend to be set larger",
> > pp->dev, base_num);
> >
> > + standard_deviation = sqrt((sum_squares - lg_toldelay *
> > lg_toldelay)
> > + / (io_num -1));
> >
>
> This assignment is wrong. It gets a "NAN" for standard_deviation.
> It should be the following equation according to sum_n (x_i -
> avg(x))^2 == sum_n x_i^2 - n * avg(x)^2
> standard_deviation = sqrt((sum_squares - io_num* lg_avglatency*
> lg_avglatency)/ (io_num -1));
> = sqrt((sum_squares - lg_toldelay*
> lg_avglatency)/ (io_num -1));
That's of course correct. I'll submit an update asap.
> I still have the doubt about the computation of the "uncertainty"
> item.
> Because I have observed that the uncertainty is in the range of 1.3 ~
> 1.6 whenever
> the base_num varies from 1.1 to 10.
> Do you mean the uncertainty as the "Error function" of (log) normal
> distribution?
> Here is the definition of
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_function
>
> I prefer to using "Error function" that describes accumulated
> probability of how prio
> locates in the (-inf, prio-1) and (prio+1, +inf).
There's a misunderstanding here.
My "uncertainty factor" describes the width of the distribution of the
*measured* latencies. It roughly represents the accuracy of the
measurement (indicating that 68%, or error_function (sqrt(1/2)), of the
measured values lie in the interval [avg/F, avg*F]). IOW, it tells you
how stable your latencies for a certain path are.
It has nothing to do with the artificial prio "bins" that the latency
prioritizer sets up. Therefore it *has to be independent* of base_num.
It just gives an indication how large base_num should be.
I hope this makes it clear.
Martin
--
Dr. Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>, Tel. +49 (0)911 74053 2107
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-07 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-18 0:11 [PATCH 0/4] path latency prio fixes Martin Wilck
2017-11-18 0:11 ` [PATCH 1/4] libmultipath: path latency: fix default base num Martin Wilck
2017-11-19 2:19 ` Guan Junxiong
2017-11-18 0:11 ` [PATCH 2/4] libmultipath: path latency: log threshold with p2 Martin Wilck
2017-11-19 2:23 ` Guan Junxiong
2017-11-18 0:11 ` [PATCH 3/4] libmultipath: path latency: simplify getprio() Martin Wilck
2017-11-19 2:52 ` Guan Junxiong
2017-11-20 8:46 ` Martin Wilck
2017-12-07 4:26 ` Guan Junxiong
2017-12-07 15:56 ` Martin Wilck [this message]
2017-11-18 0:11 ` [PATCH 4/4] libmultipath: path latency: remove warnings Martin Wilck
2017-11-19 3:00 ` Guan Junxiong
2017-11-20 9:11 ` [PATCH 0/4] path latency prio fixes Martin Wilck
2017-12-08 20:49 ` Benjamin Marzinski
[not found] <06F84A57D601574CAA706EE1A6270A5F01039500@DGGEMM505-MBX.china.huawei.com>
2017-11-23 2:20 ` [PATCH 3/4] libmultipath: path latency: simplify getprio() Guan Junxiong
2017-11-23 12:23 ` Martin Wilck
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=1512662201.3207.25.camel@suse.com \
--to=mwilck@suse.com \
--cc=christophe.varoqui@opensvc.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=guanjunxiong@huawei.com \
--cc=niuhaoxin@huawei.com \
--cc=shenhong09@huawei.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox