From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
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 1/2] nfs: writeback pages wait queue
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 23:54:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111023155439.GA7286@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111020160530.GC7054@localhost>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 808 bytes --]
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:05:30AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> Trond,
>
> After applying these two patches, the IO-less patchset performances
> 45% better than the vanilla kernel and the average commit size only
> decreases by -16% in the common NFS-thresh=1G/nfs-1dd case :)
To better understand how the NFS writeback wait queue helps, I
visualized the network traffic over time. Attached are the graphs for
the vanilla kernel and the one with the IO-less + NFS wait queue
patches.
nfs-1dd-4k-32p-32016M-1024M:10-3.1.0-rc8-vanilla+/dstat-bw.png
nfs-1dd-4k-32p-31951M-1024M:10-3.1.0-rc8-nfs-wq4+/dstat-bw.png
The obvious difference is, the network traffic become now more
distributed and the "zero traffic" periods are mostly reduced.
The other 2dd, 10dd cases have similar results.
Thanks,
Fengguang
[-- Attachment #2: dstat-bw.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 23197 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #3: dstat-bw.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 22149 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-23 15:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-20 15:55 [PATCH 1/2] nfs: writeback pages wait queue Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 15:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] nfs: scale writeback threshold proportional to dirty threshold Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 16:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] nfs: writeback pages wait queue Wu Fengguang
2011-10-22 7:34 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-23 15:54 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2011-10-25 21:08 ` 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=20111023155439.GA7286@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.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=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.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).