From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch,rfc v2] ext3/4: enhance fsync performance when using cfq
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:31:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100408143102.GE10879@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49hbnm9g29.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 10:25:50AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 10:03:24AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> >> Which actually brings up the question of whether this needs some
> >> knowledge of whether the journal is on the same device as the file
> >> system! In such a case, we need not yield. I think I'll stick my head
> >> in the sand for this one. ;-)
> >
> > Jeff even if journal is not on same device, what harm yielding could do?
> > Anyway there is no IO on that queue and we are idling. Only side affect is
> > that yielding process could lose a bit if after fsync it immediately submits
> > more IO. Because this process has yielded it slice, it is back in the queue
> > instead of doing more IO in the current slice immediately.
>
> What happens if the journal is on a super fast device, and finishes up
> very quickly allowing our process to initiate more I/O within the idle
> window?
>
You lose. :-) But at the same time if journalling devices is not fast
enough, and you if can't submit next IO in idling window, then you are
unnecessarily keeping the disk idle and preventing others from making
progress.
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-08 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-07 21:18 [patch,rfc v2] ext3/4: enhance fsync performance when using cfq Jeff Moyer
2010-04-07 21:46 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 11:04 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 14:05 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 14:09 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 14:17 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 14:24 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-04-08 19:23 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-21 20:42 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-04-21 20:52 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-04-08 11:00 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 13:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 14:03 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 14:03 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-04-08 14:06 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 14:10 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 14:25 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-04-08 14:31 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2010-04-08 19:10 ` Jeff Moyer
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=20100408143102.GE10879@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).