From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: "Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
"linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: ext4 data=writeback performs worse than data=ordered now
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:27:59 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111215122759.7ce0b7b5@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111215010010.GA14805@localhost>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1142 bytes --]
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:00:10 +0800 Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
wrote:
> > I found sometimes one disk hasn't any request inflight, but we can't
> > send request to the disk, because the scsi host's resource (the queue
> > depth) is used out, looks we send too many requests from other disks and
> > leave some disks starved. The resource imbalance in scsi isn't a new
> > problem, even 3.1 has such issue, so I'd think writeback introduces new
> > imbalance between the 12 disks. In fact, if I limit disk's queue depth
> > to 10, in this way the 12 disks will not impact each other in scsi
> > layer, the performance regression fully disappears for both writeback
> > and order mode.
>
> I observe similar issue in MD. The default
>
> q->nr_requests = BLKDEV_MAX_RQ;
>
> is too small for large arrays, and I end up doing
>
> echo 1280 > /sys/block/md0/queue/nr_requests
>
> in my tests.
And you find this makes a difference?
That is very surprising because md devices don't use requests (and really use
the 'queue' at all) and definitely don't make use of nr_requests.
NeilBrown
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-15 1:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20111214133400.GA18565@localhost>
[not found] ` <20111214143014.GB18080@thunk.org>
[not found] ` <1323910977.22361.423.camel@sli10-conroe>
2011-12-15 1:00 ` ext4 data=writeback performs worse than data=ordered now Wu Fengguang
2011-12-15 1:27 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2011-12-15 1:34 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-12-15 5:02 ` 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=20111215122759.7ce0b7b5@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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).