From: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@MIT.EDU>
Cc: adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, tj@kernel.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] percpu_counter: Put a reasonable upper bound on percpu_counter_batch
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 21:54:39 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110829215439.63353384@kryten> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A91A91A5-9EF0-42FE-B1C3-184D65112EA9@mit.edu>
Hi Ted,
> I understand why we would want to reduce this number.
> Unfortunately, the question is what do we do if all 1024 threads try
> to do buffered writes into the file system at the same instant, when
> we have less than 4 megabytes of space left?
>
> The problem is that we can then do more writes than we have space, and
> we will only find out about it at write back time, when the process
> may have exited already -- at which point data loss is almost
> inevitable. (We could keep the data in cache and frantically page
> the system administrator to delete some files to make room for dirty
> data, but that's probably not going to end well….)
>
> What we can do if we must clamp this threshold is to also increase the
> threshold at which we shift away from delayed allocation. We'll then
> allocate each block at write time, which does mean more CPU and
> less efficient allocation of blocks, but if we're down to our last 4
> megabytes, there's probably not much we can do that will be efficient
> as far as block layout anyway….
Thanks for the explanation, I'll go back and take another look.
Anton
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-29 11:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-25 21:26 [PATCH 1/2] ext4: EXT4_FREEBLOCKS_WATERMARK is overly pessimistic Anton Blanchard
2011-08-25 21:29 ` [PATCH 2/2] percpu_counter: Put a reasonable upper bound on percpu_counter_batch Anton Blanchard
2011-08-26 8:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-08-29 11:46 ` [PATCH] " Anton Blanchard
2011-09-06 3:48 ` Tejun Heo
2011-09-06 13:30 ` Theodore Tso
2011-09-06 16:44 ` Tejun Heo
2011-09-07 11:08 ` Anton Blanchard
2011-08-26 9:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Tejun Heo
2011-08-26 11:48 ` Theodore Tso
2011-08-29 11:54 ` Anton Blanchard [this message]
2011-08-29 13:27 ` Ted Ts'o
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=20110829215439.63353384@kryten \
--to=anton@samba.org \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@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).