From: Martin Steigerwald <martin@lichtvoll.de>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Tim Cuthbertson <ratcheer@gmail.com>,
Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
Subject: Re: Scrub of my nvme SSD has slowed by about 2/3
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 11:25:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1956200.usQuhbGJ8B@lichtvoll.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <22b2a8da-5225-7703-e8c6-75c25baa986d@gmx.com>
Qu Wenruo - 11.07.23, 10:59:55 CEST:
> On 2023/7/11 13:52, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Martin Steigerwald - 11.07.23, 07:49:43 CEST:
> >> I see about 180000 reads in 10 seconds in atop. I have seen latency
> >> values from 55 to 85 µs which is highly unusual for NVME SSD
> >> ("avio"
> >> in atop¹).
> >
> > Well I did not compare to a base line during scrub with 6.3. So not
> > actually sure about the unusual bit. But at least during daily
> > activity I do not see those values.
> >
> > Anyway, I am willing to test a patch.
>
> Mind to try the following branch?
>
> https://github.com/adam900710/linux/tree/scrub_multi_thread
>
> Or you can grab the commit on top and backport to any kernel >= 6.4.
Cherry picking the commit on top of v6.4.3 lead to a merge conflict.
Since this is a production machine and I am no kernel developer with
insight to the inner workings of BTRFS, I'd prefer a patch that applies
cleanly on top of v6.4.3. I'd rather not try out a tree, unless I know
its a stable kernel version or at least rc3/4 or later. Again this is a
production machine.
You know, I prefer to keep my data :)
> Thanks,
> Qu
>
> >> [1] according to man page atop(1) from atop 2.9:
> >>
> >> the average number of milliseconds needed by a request ('avio') for
> >> seek, latency and data transfer
--
Martin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-11 9:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-03 20:19 Scrub of my nvme SSD has slowed by about 2/3 Tim Cuthbertson
2023-07-03 23:49 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-05 2:44 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-11 5:36 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-11 5:33 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-11 5:49 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-11 5:52 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-11 8:59 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-11 9:25 ` Martin Steigerwald [this message]
2023-07-11 9:57 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-11 10:56 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-11 11:05 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-11 11:26 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-11 11:33 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-11 11:47 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-14 0:28 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-14 6:01 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-14 6:58 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-16 9:57 ` Sebastian Döring
2023-07-16 10:55 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-16 16:01 ` Sebastian Döring
2023-07-17 5:23 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-07-12 11:02 ` Linux regression tracking #adding (Thorsten Leemhuis)
2023-07-19 6:42 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-07-19 6:55 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-08-29 12:17 ` Linux regression tracking #update (Thorsten Leemhuis)
2023-09-08 11:54 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-09-08 22:03 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-09-09 8:06 ` Martin Steigerwald
2023-10-13 13:07 ` Martin Steigerwald
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=1956200.usQuhbGJ8B@lichtvoll.de \
--to=martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
--cc=ratcheer@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