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 12:33:24 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100224043324.GA31913@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100224042414.GG16175@discord.disaster>
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:24:14PM +0800, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 02:29:34PM +1100, 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
> > 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....
>
> FWIW, if you mount the client with "-o rsize=32k" or the server only
> supports rsize <= 32k then this will probably hurt throughput a lot
> because then readahead will be capped at 64k instead of 480k....
That's why I take the max of 2*rsize and system default readahead size
(which will be enlarged to 512K):
- server->backing_dev_info.ra_pages = server->rpages * NFS_MAX_READAHEAD;
+ server->backing_dev_info.ra_pages = max_t(unsigned long,
+ default_backing_dev_info.ra_pages,
+ 2 * server->rpages);
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-24 4:33 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
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 [this message]
[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=20100224043324.GA31913@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).