linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
	"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] nfs: use 2*rsize readahead size
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 12:18:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100224041822.GB27459@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100224032934.GF16175@discord.disaster>

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:29:34AM +0800, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:41:01AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > With default rsize=512k and NFS_MAX_READAHEAD=15, the current NFS
> > readahead size 512k*15=7680k is too large than necessary for typical
> > clients.
> > 
> > On a e1000e--e1000e connection, I got the following numbers
> > 
> > 	readahead size		throughput
> > 		   16k           35.5 MB/s
> > 		   32k           54.3 MB/s
> > 		   64k           64.1 MB/s
> > 		  128k           70.5 MB/s
> > 		  256k           74.6 MB/s
> > rsize ==>	  512k           77.4 MB/s
> > 		 1024k           85.5 MB/s
> > 		 2048k           86.8 MB/s
> > 		 4096k           87.9 MB/s
> > 		 8192k           89.0 MB/s
> > 		16384k           87.7 MB/s
> > 
> > So it seems that readahead_size=2*rsize (ie. keep two RPC requests in flight)
> > can already get near full NFS bandwidth.
> > 
> > The test script is:
> > 
> > #!/bin/sh
> > 
> > file=/mnt/sparse
> > BDI=0:15
> > 
> > for rasize in 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 8192 16384
> > do
> > 	echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
> > 	echo $rasize > /sys/devices/virtual/bdi/$BDI/read_ahead_kb
> > 	echo readahead_size=${rasize}k
> > 	dd if=$file of=/dev/null bs=4k count=1024000
> > done
> 
> That's doing a cached read out of the server cache, right? You

It does not involve disk IO at least. (The sparse file dataset is
larger than server cache.)

> might find the results are different if the server has to read the
> file from disk. I would expect reads from the server cache not
> to require much readahead as there is no IO latency on the server
> side for the readahead to hide....

Sure the result will be different when disk IO is involved.
In this case I would expect the server admin to setup the optimal
readahead size for the disk(s).

It sounds silly to have

        client_readahead_size > server_readahead_size

Thanks,
Fengguang

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-24  4:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-24  2:41 [RFC] nfs: use 2*rsize readahead size Wu Fengguang
2010-02-24  3:29 ` Dave Chinner
2010-02-24  4:18   ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2010-02-24  5:22     ` Dave Chinner
2010-02-24  6:12       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-02-24  7:39         ` Dave Chinner
2010-02-26  7:49           ` [RFC] nfs: use 4*rsize " Wu Fengguang
2010-03-02  3:10             ` Wu Fengguang
2010-03-02 14:19               ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-02 17:33                 ` John Stoffel
     [not found]                   ` <19341.19446.356359.99958-HgN6juyGXH5AfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 18:42                     ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-03  3:27                       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-14 21:22                         ` Dean Hildebrand
2010-03-02 20:14               ` Bret Towe
2010-03-03  1:43                 ` Wu Fengguang
     [not found]       ` <20100224052215.GH16175-CJ6yYqJ1V6CgjvmRZuSThA@public.gmane.org>
2010-02-24 11:18         ` [RFC] nfs: use 2*rsize " Akshat Aranya
2010-02-25 12:37           ` Wu Fengguang
2010-02-24  4:24   ` Dave Chinner
2010-02-24  4:33     ` Wu Fengguang
     [not found]     ` <20100224042414.GG16175-CJ6yYqJ1V6CgjvmRZuSThA@public.gmane.org>
2010-02-24  4:43       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-02-24  5:24         ` Dave Chinner

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=20100224041822.GB27459@localhost \
    --to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).