From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Monakhov Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] ext4: Try to better reuse recently freed space Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 15:44:53 +0400 Message-ID: <87ioqtuvd6.fsf@openvz.org> References: <20140401053018.GP4911@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: =?utf-8?B?THVrw6HFoQ==?= Czerner , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Theodore Ts'o , Andreas Dilger Return-path: Received: from mail-la0-f53.google.com ([209.85.215.53]:60238 "EHLO mail-la0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751453AbaDALo6 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2014 07:44:58 -0400 Received: by mail-la0-f53.google.com with SMTP id b8so6958695lan.12 for ; Tue, 01 Apr 2014 04:44:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140401053018.GP4911@thunk.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 1 Apr 2014 01:30:18 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 05:32:06PM +0100, Luk=C3=A1=C5=A1 Czerner wro= te: > > Hi all, > >=20 > > this is the patch I send a while ago to fix the issue I've seen wit= h > > a global allocation goal. This might no longer apply to the current > > kernel and it might not be the best approach, but I use this exampl= e > > just to start a discussion about those allocation goals and how to > > use, or change them. > >=20 > > I think that we agree that the long term fix would be to have free > > extent map. But we might be able to do something quickly, unless > > someone commits to make the free extent map reality :) >=20 > Hi Andreas, >=20 > We discussed possibly applying this patch last week at the ext4 > workshop, possibly as early as for the 3.15 merge window: >=20 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/295956/ >=20 > However, I'm guessing that Lustre has the workload which is most > likely to regress if we were to simply apply this patch. But, it's > likely it will improve things for many/most other ext4 workloads. >=20 > We did talk about trying to assemble some block allocation performanc= e > tests so we can better measure proposed changes to the block > allocator, but that's not something we have yet. However, this globa= l BTW where this can I find this discussion? I would like to cooperate this that activity. Please CC me next time you will disscuss allocation performance mesurments. At Parallels we run https://oss.oracle.com/~mas= on/compilebench/ as load simulator. > goal is definitely causing problems for a number of use cases, > including thinp and being flash friendly. >=20 > Would you be willing to apply this patch and then run some benchmarks > to see if Lustre would be impacted negatively if we were to apply thi= s > patch for the next development cycle (i.e., not for 3.15, but for the > next merge window)? >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > - Ted > -- > 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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html