From: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@suse.de>
To: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: splice read byte accounting
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:46:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B61AA67.2050701@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <EAD3EA8D-52B9-43D4-8A35-B623270AF688@oracle.com>
On 01/28/2010 08:37 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
> On Jan 27, 2010, at 6:19 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>> On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 17:22 -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>> Hi-
>>>
>>> nfs_file_splice_write() accounts for the bytes in the request in the
>>> "normal bytes written" counter, but nfs_file_splice_read() does not
>>> account for bytes read.
>>>
>>> Should the read path count these as normal bytes as well, or should
>>> the write path not account for these bytes?
>>>
>>
>> nfs_file_splice_read() should probably update NFSIOS_NORMALREADBYTES.
Yes, I think. Looks like a oversight while we added splice write
support. The argument then was the number of bytes written via splice
are effectively cached writes and hence makes sense to add it to
NFSIO_NORMALWRITTENBYTES.
>> That said, why do nfs_file_read(), nfs_file_write() and
>> nfs_file_splice_write() update the stats with the requested number of
>> bytes, irrespective of the number of bytes that were actually
>> read/write?
>
> We're counting the number of bytes requested by applications. I'm not
> sure which is more useful here; number of bytes requested, or number of
> bytes actually read/written. For computing ratios of app bytes v. otw
> bytes, I suppose the latter?
>
I think the number of bytes actually read/written would be more useful.
Thanks,
--
Suresh Jayaraman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-28 15:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-27 22:22 splice read byte accounting Chuck Lever
2010-01-27 23:19 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-01-28 15:07 ` Chuck Lever
2010-01-28 15:15 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-01-28 16:07 ` Chuck Lever
2010-01-28 15:16 ` Suresh Jayaraman [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=4B61AA67.2050701@suse.de \
--to=sjayaraman@suse.de \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/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