From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>,
eshishki@redhat.com, rwheeler@redhat.com,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, sandeen@redhat.com
Subject: Re: Ext4: batched discard support - simplified version
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 11:13:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <x49hbjqjknj.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100723143604.GF13090@thunk.org> (Ted Ts'o's message of "Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:36:04 -0400")
"Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 09:53:30AM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> since my last post I have done some more testing with various SSD's and the
>> trend is clear. Trim performance is getting better and the performance loss
>> without trim is getting lower. So I have decided to abandon the initial idea
>> to track free blocks within some internal data structure - it takes time and
>> memory.
>
> Do you have some numbers about how bad trim actually might be on
> various devices?
I'll let Lukas answer that when he gets back to the office next week.
The performance of the trim command itself varies by vendor, of course.
> I can imagine some devices where it might be better (for wear
> levelling and better write endurance if nothing else) where it's
> better to do the trim right away instead of batching things.
I don't think so. In all of the configurations tested, I'm pretty sure
we saw a performance hit from doing the TRIMs right away. The queue
flush really hurts. Of course, I have no idea what you had in mind for
the amount of time in between batched discards.
> So what I'm thinking about doing is keeping the "discard" mount option
> to mean non-batched discard. If you want to use the explicit FITRIM
> ioctl, I don't think we need to test to see if the dicard mount option
> is set; if the user issues the ioctl, then we should do the batched
> discard, and if we don't trust the user to do that, then well, the
> ioctl should be restricted to privileged users only --- especially if
> it could take up to a minute.
That sounds reasonable to me.
Cheers,
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-23 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-07 7:53 Ext4: batched discard support - simplified version Lukas Czerner
2010-07-07 7:53 ` [PATCH 1/2] Add ioctl FITRIM Lukas Czerner
2010-07-07 7:53 ` [PATCH 2/2] Add batched discard support for ext4 Lukas Czerner
2010-07-14 8:33 ` Dmitry Monakhov
2010-07-14 9:40 ` Lukas Czerner
2010-07-14 10:03 ` Dmitry Monakhov
2010-07-14 11:43 ` Lukas Czerner
2010-07-23 14:36 ` Ext4: batched discard support - simplified version Ted Ts'o
2010-07-23 15:13 ` Jeff Moyer [this message]
2010-07-23 15:19 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-07-23 15:40 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-07-23 17:00 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-07-24 16:31 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-07-23 15:30 ` Greg Freemyer
2010-07-26 10:30 ` Lukas Czerner
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=x49hbjqjknj.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com \
--to=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=eshishki@redhat.com \
--cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rwheeler@redhat.com \
--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).