From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 v2] add extent status tree caching
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:22:35 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <x498v12iq8k.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130719033309.GQ11674@dastard> (Dave Chinner's message of "Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:33:09 +1000")
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:59:34PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 07:56:45PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> > > The problem is we don't know that we're doing AIO until we see the
>> > > first io_submit(2) call. With this patch series, we'll pull the
>> > > contents of the entire leaf tree block into extent cache, but if the
>> > > extent tree is larger than that, if we read in the entire extent tree
>> > > on the first AIO request, then that first request will delayed even
>> > > more, and it's not clear that's a good thing.
>> >
>> > Is blocking on a pre-AIO ioctl better than blocking on the
>> > first AIO?
>>
>> The precache ioctl is something which the application is expecting to
>> block. The question is, if we have a heavily fragmented extent tree,
>> is it better for the first AIO to block long enough to read in one
>> metadata block --- and then never block again, or to have that first
>> AIO request take a long, LONG time? Especially if the application
>> isn't expecting it?
>>
>> Also there are use cases for the precache ioctl even if you are not
>> using AIO. If you've taken care to make sure the file is as
>> contiguous as possible, having the extents be cached will save a lot
>> of memory compared to if the buffer heads are always entering the
>> buffer cache. So reading in all of the metadata can be a good thing
>> to do, especially if you can do this *before* you declare that the
>> server is healthy and is ready to start receiving traffic.
>
> An ioctl is kinda silly for this. Just use O_NONBLOCK when calling
> open() and do the prefetch right in the open call. The open() can
> block, anyway, and what you are trying to do is non-blocking IO with
> AIO, so it seems like we've already got a sensible, generic
> interface for triggering this sort of prefetch operation.
Hmm, O_NONBLOCK on regular files, eh? That brings back memories:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/481855
I don't recall exactly how that ended, but I'm pretty sure the
conclusion was that it was a bad idea.
-Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-19 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-16 15:17 [PATCH 0/5 v2] add extent status tree caching Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-16 15:17 ` [PATCH 1/5] ext4: refactor code to read the extent tree block Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-16 15:18 ` [PATCH 2/5] ext4: print the block number of invalid extent tree blocks Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-18 0:56 ` Zheng Liu
2013-07-16 15:18 ` [PATCH 3/5] ext4: use unsigned int for es_status values Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-16 15:18 ` [PATCH 4/5] ext4: cache all of an extent tree's leaf block upon reading Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-16 15:18 ` [PATCH 5/5] ext4: add new ioctl EXT4_IOC_PRECACHE_EXTENTS Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-18 1:19 ` Zheng Liu
2013-07-18 2:50 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-18 13:06 ` Zheng Liu
2013-07-18 15:21 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-18 18:35 ` [PATCH 0/5 v2] add extent status tree caching Eric Sandeen
2013-07-18 18:53 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-19 0:56 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-07-19 2:59 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-19 3:33 ` Dave Chinner
2013-07-19 14:22 ` Jeff Moyer [this message]
2013-07-19 16:19 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-22 1:38 ` Dave Chinner
2013-07-22 2:17 ` Zheng Liu
2013-07-22 10:02 ` Dave Chinner
2013-07-22 12:57 ` Zheng Liu
2013-07-30 3:08 ` Dave Chinner
2013-08-04 1:27 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-08-13 3:10 ` Dave Chinner
2013-08-13 3:21 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-08-13 13:04 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-08-16 3:21 ` Dave Chinner
2013-08-16 14:39 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-18 23:54 ` Zheng Liu
2013-07-19 0:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-07-19 1:03 ` Zheng Liu
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=x498v12iq8k.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com \
--to=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--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).