From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Richard Kennedy <richard@rsk.demon.co.uk>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] writeback: reduce per-bdi dirty threshold ramp up time
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:52:11 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110413235211.GN31057@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110413233122.GA6097@localhost>
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 07:31:22AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 06:04:44AM +0800, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Wed 13-04-11 16:59:41, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > Reduce the dampening for the control system, yielding faster
> > > convergence. The change is a bit conservative, as smaller values may
> > > lead to noticeable bdi threshold fluctuates in low memory JBOD setup.
> > >
> > > CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > > CC: Richard Kennedy <richard@rsk.demon.co.uk>
> > > Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > Well, I have nothing against this change as such but what I don't like is
> > that it just changes magical +2 for similarly magical +0. It's clear that
>
> The patch tends to make the rampup time a bit more reasonable for
> common desktops. From 100s to 25s (see below).
>
> > this will lead to more rapid updates of proportions of bdi's share of
> > writeback and thread's share of dirtying but why +0? Why not +1 or -1? So
>
> Yes, it will especially be a problem on _small memory_ JBOD setups.
> Richard actually has requested for a much radical change (decrease by
> 6) but that looks too much.
>
> My team has a 12-disk JBOD with only 6G memory. The memory is pretty
> small as a server, but it's a real setup and serves well as the
> reference minimal setup that Linux should be able to run well on.
FWIW, linux runs on a lot of low power NAS boxes with jbod and/or
raid setups that have <= 1GB of RAM (many of them run XFS), so even
your setup could be considered large by a significant fraction of
the storage world. Hence you need to be careful of optimising for
what you think is a "normal" server, because there simply isn't such
a thing....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-13 23:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-13 8:59 [PATCH 0/4] trivial writeback fixes Wu Fengguang
2011-04-13 8:59 ` [PATCH 1/4] writeback: add bdi_dirty_limit() kernel-doc Wu Fengguang
2011-04-13 21:47 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-13 8:59 ` [PATCH 2/4] writeback: avoid duplicate balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited() calls Wu Fengguang
2011-04-13 21:53 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-14 0:30 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-14 10:20 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-13 8:59 ` [PATCH 3/4] writeback: skip balance_dirty_pages() for in-memory fs Wu Fengguang
2011-04-13 21:54 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-13 8:59 ` [PATCH 4/4] writeback: reduce per-bdi dirty threshold ramp up time Wu Fengguang
2011-04-13 22:04 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-13 23:31 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-13 23:52 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2011-04-14 0:23 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-14 10:36 ` Richard Kennedy
2011-04-14 13:49 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-14 14:08 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-14 15:14 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-14 15:56 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-14 18:16 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-15 3:43 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-15 14:37 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-15 22:13 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-16 6:05 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-16 8:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-16 14:21 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-17 2:11 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-18 14:59 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-24 12:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-24 12:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-09 23:58 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-13 10:15 ` [PATCH 0/4] trivial writeback fixes Peter Zijlstra
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=20110413235211.GN31057@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=richard@rsk.demon.co.uk \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/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).