From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
pbadari@us.ibm.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] BZ#694309: nfs: use unstable writes for groups of small DIO writes
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:13:14 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110415041314.GA27874@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1302785008-30477-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com>
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 08:43:28AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Currently, the client uses FILE_SYNC whenever it's writing less than or
> equal data to the wsize with O_DIRECT. This is a problem though if we
> have a bunch of small iovec's batched up in a single writev call. The
> client will iterate over them and do a single FILE_SYNC WRITE for each.
>
> Instead, change the code to do unstable writes when we'll need to do
> multiple WRITE RPC's in order to satisfy the request. While we're at
> it, optimize away the allocation of commit_data when we aren't going
> to use it anyway.
>
> I tested this with a program that allocates 256 page-sized and aligned
> chunks of data into an array of iovecs, opens a file with O_DIRECT, and
> then passes that into a writev call 128 times. Without this patch, it
> took 5m16s to run on my (admittedly crappy) test rig. With this patch,
> it finished in 7.5s.
>
> Trond, would it be reasonable to take this patch as a stopgap measure
> until your overhaul of the O_DIRECT code is finished?
To me your patch looks like a good quick fix for this issue. I'm
not actually sure how Trond's re-architecture is supposed to look like
given that pagecache writeback and DIO writes are pretty fundamentally
driven, but I can't image a design that wouldn't allow for a similar
quirk on when to use stable writes and when not.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-15 4:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-14 12:43 [PATCH] BZ#694309: nfs: use unstable writes for groups of small DIO writes Jeff Layton
2011-04-15 4:13 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20110415041314.GA27874@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbadari@us.ibm.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).