From: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
To: fdmanana@kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] btrfs: only commit the delayed inode when doing a full fsync
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 09:00:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fea5eee9-95ff-c8a8-4f1f-3682378d1813@toxicpanda.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200702113159.153135-1-fdmanana@kernel.org>
On 7/2/20 7:31 AM, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
>
> Commit 2c2c452b0cafdc ("Btrfs: fix fsync when extend references are added
> to an inode") forced a commit of the delayed inode when logging an inode
> in order to ensure we would end up logging the inode item during a full
> fsync. By committing the delayed inode, we updated the inode item in the
> fs/subvolume tree and then later when copying items from leafs modified in
> the current transaction into the log tree (with copy_inode_items_to_log())
> we ended up copying the inode item from the fs/subvolume tree into the log
> tree. Logging an up to date version of the inode item is required to make
> sure at log replay time we get the link count fixup triggered among other
> things (replay xattr deletes, etc). The test case generic/040 from fstests
> exercises the bug which that commit fixed.
>
> However for a fast fsync we don't need to commit the delayed inode because
> we always log an up to date version of the inode item based on the struct
> btrfs_inode we have in-memory. We started doing this for fast fsyncs since
> commit e4545de5b035c7 ("Btrfs: fix fsync data loss after append write").
>
> So just stop committing the delayed inode if we are doing a fast fsync,
> we are only wasting time and adding contention on fs/subvolume tree.
>
> This patch is part of a series that has the following patches:
>
> 1/4 btrfs: only commit the delayed inode when doing a full fsync
> 2/4 btrfs: only commit delayed items at fsync if we are logging a directory
> 3/4 btrfs: stop incremening log_batch for the log root tree when syncing log
> 4/4 btrfs: remove no longer needed use of log_writers for the log root tree
>
> After the entire patchset applied I saw about 12% decrease on max latency
> reported by dbench. The test was done on a qemu vm, with 8 cores, 16Gb of
> ram, using kvm and using a raw NVMe device directly (no intermediary fs on
> the host). The test was invoked like the following:
>
> mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdk
> mount -o ssd -o nospace_cache /dev/sdk /mnt/sdk
> dbench -D /mnt/sdk -t 300 8
> umount /mnt/dsk
>
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-02 13:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-02 11:31 [PATCH 1/4] btrfs: only commit the delayed inode when doing a full fsync fdmanana
2020-07-02 13:00 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2020-07-03 12:08 ` David Sterba
2020-07-03 14:36 ` Filipe Manana
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=fea5eee9-95ff-c8a8-4f1f-3682378d1813@toxicpanda.com \
--to=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=fdmanana@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox