Linux bcache driver list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.com>
To: Pradeep Jindal <praddyjindal@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 84% -> 60% cache hit ratio for same workflow, different conf
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 22:19:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160328201907.GA20296@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANEjr_Tspy0hyNgTQwL38X0jvcNUon_g2HMyoqZFQS+7e2qKow@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 01:35:32AM +0530, Pradeep Jindal wrote:

> > > I am facing a weird problem, I earlier had a configuration wherein my
> > > backing device was a logical volume (LVM) backed by 3 software RAID0
> > > arrays having 2x1TB disks each, so totally 6TB of storage for backing
> > > device and 300GB logical volume (LVM) backed by SSD as a caching
> > > device. Both were configured as a cache set and I was getting around
> > > 84% cache hit ratio.
> > >
> > > Now, I have changed the backing device to a bare (no LVM, no raid) 6TB
> > > disk while everything else stays same (caching device on LVM, 300GB)
> > > and for exactly same workload I am only getting 58-60% cache hit
> > > ratio.
> > >
> > > I am confused, what could be the reason?
> >
> > Full stripe size writes are configured according to the backing device,
> > for example.

> Didn't quite get it, could you please elaborate?

Backing devices that advertise a stripe size cause bcache to enable a
mode where it tries to always write a full stripe to the backing
devices, hence changing behavior of the cache.

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
Director SuSE Labs

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-03-28 20:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-28 18:17 84% -> 60% cache hit ratio for same workflow, different conf Pradeep Jindal
2016-03-28 19:17 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2016-03-28 20:10   ` Pradeep Jindal
     [not found]   ` <CANEjr_Tspy0hyNgTQwL38X0jvcNUon_g2HMyoqZFQS+7e2qKow@mail.gmail.com>
2016-03-28 20:19     ` Vojtech Pavlik [this message]
2016-03-28 20:22       ` Pradeep Jindal
     [not found]       ` <CANEjr_TWKkUB54rYOr84UmKXrGeJdN7c2z5Z-QerwNRT1Lz-9Q@mail.gmail.com>
2016-03-28 20:26         ` Pradeep Jindal
2016-03-29  6:02           ` Pradeep Jindal

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=20160328201907.GA20296@suse.cz \
    --to=vojtech@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=praddyjindal@gmail.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