From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] IO-less dirty throttling v12
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:42:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111005014242.GA10237@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111003135902.GA16518@localhost>
> As far as I can tell from the current test results,
> the writeback performance mostly stays on par with vanilla 3.1 kernel
> except for -14% regression on average for NFS, which can be cut down
> to -7% by limiting the commit size.
I find that the overall NFS throughput can be improved by 42% when
doing the NFS writeback wait queue and limiting the commit size.
3.1.0-rc8-ioless6+ 3.1.0-rc8-nfs-wq-smooth+
------------------------ ------------------------
22.43 +79.2% 40.20 NFS-thresh=100M/nfs-10dd-1M-32p-32768M-100M:10-X
28.21 +11.9% 31.58 NFS-thresh=100M/nfs-1dd-1M-32p-32768M-100M:10-X
29.21 +54.0% 44.98 NFS-thresh=100M/nfs-2dd-1M-32p-32768M-100M:10-X
14.12 +31.0% 18.50 NFS-thresh=10M/nfs-10dd-1M-32p-32768M-10M:10-X
29.44 +2.1% 30.06 NFS-thresh=10M/nfs-1dd-1M-32p-32768M-10M:10-X
9.09 +231.0% 30.07 NFS-thresh=10M/nfs-2dd-1M-32p-32768M-10M:10-X
25.68 +88.6% 48.43 NFS-thresh=1G/nfs-10dd-1M-32p-32768M-1024M:10-X
41.06 +14.9% 47.16 NFS-thresh=1G/nfs-1dd-1M-32p-32768M-1024M:10-X
39.13 +26.7% 49.56 NFS-thresh=1G/nfs-2dd-1M-32p-32768M-1024M:10-X
238.38 +42.9% 340.54 TOTAL
The theoretic explanation could be, one smooths out the NFS write
requests and the other smooths out the NFS commits, hence yielding
better utilized network/disk pipeline.
As a result, the -14% regression can be turned around into 23% speedup
comparing to vanilla kernel:
3.1.0-rc4-vanilla+ 3.1.0-rc8-nfs-wq-smooth+
------------------------ ------------------------
20.89 +92.5% 40.20 NFS-thresh=100M/nfs-10dd-1M-32p-32768M-100M:10-X
39.43 -19.9% 31.58 NFS-thresh=100M/nfs-1dd-1M-32p-32768M-100M:10-X
26.60 +69.1% 44.98 NFS-thresh=100M/nfs-2dd-1M-32p-32768M-100M:10-X
12.70 +45.7% 18.50 NFS-thresh=10M/nfs-10dd-1M-32p-32768M-10M:10-X
27.41 +9.7% 30.06 NFS-thresh=10M/nfs-1dd-1M-32p-32768M-10M:10-X
26.52 +13.4% 30.07 NFS-thresh=10M/nfs-2dd-1M-32p-32768M-10M:10-X
40.70 +19.0% 48.43 NFS-thresh=1G/nfs-10dd-1M-32p-32768M-1024M:10-X
45.28 +4.2% 47.16 NFS-thresh=1G/nfs-1dd-1M-32p-32768M-1024M:10-X
35.74 +38.7% 49.56 NFS-thresh=1G/nfs-2dd-1M-32p-32768M-1024M:10-X
275.28 +23.7% 340.54 TOTAL
The tests don't cover disk arrays on the server side, however it does
test various combinations of memory:bandwidth ratio.
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/ .
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:[~2011-10-05 1:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-03 13:42 [PATCH 00/11] IO-less dirty throttling v12 Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 01/11] writeback: account per-bdi accumulated dirtied pages Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 02/11] writeback: dirty position control Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 03/11] writeback: add bg_threshold parameter to __bdi_update_bandwidth() Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 04/11] writeback: dirty rate control Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 05/11] writeback: stabilize bdi->dirty_ratelimit Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 06/11] writeback: per task dirty rate limit Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 07/11] writeback: IO-less balance_dirty_pages() Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 08/11] writeback: limit max dirty pause time Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 09/11] writeback: control " Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 10/11] writeback: dirty position control - bdi reserve area Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:42 ` [PATCH 11/11] writeback: per-bdi background threshold Wu Fengguang
2011-10-03 13:59 ` [PATCH 00/11] IO-less dirty throttling v12 Wu Fengguang
2011-10-05 1:42 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2011-10-04 19:52 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-05 13:56 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-05 15:16 ` Andi Kleen
2011-10-10 12:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-10 13:07 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-10 13:10 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] nfs: writeback pages wait queue Wu Fengguang
2011-10-10 13:11 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] nfs: scale writeback threshold proportional to dirty threshold Wu Fengguang
2011-10-18 8:53 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-18 8:59 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 2:49 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-18 8:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] nfs: writeback pages wait queue Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 3:59 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-10 14:28 ` [PATCH 00/11] IO-less dirty throttling v12 Wu Fengguang
2011-10-17 3:03 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 3:39 ` Wu Fengguang
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=20111005014242.GA10237@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arighi@develer.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=vgoyal@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).