From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: "Salyzyn, Mark" <mark_salyzyn@adaptec.com>
Cc: linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC]: performance improvement by coalescing requests?
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:01:06 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42B72E92.7050306@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60807403EABEB443939A5A7AA8A7458B01520EDD@otce2k01.adaptec.com>
Salyzyn, Mark wrote:
> This is not a patch to be applied to any release, for discussion only.
>
> We have managed to increase the performance of the I/O to the driver by
> pushing back on the scsi_merge layer when we detect that we are issuing
> sequential requests (patch enclosed below to demonstrate the technique
> used to investigate). In the algorithm used, when we see that we have an
> I/O that adjoins the previous request, we reduce the queue depth to a
> value of 2 for the device. This allows the incoming I/O to be
> scrutinized by the scsi_merge layer for a bit longer permitting them to
> be merged together into a larger more efficient request.
>
> By limiting the queue to a depth of two, we also do not delay the system
> much since we keep one worker and one outstanding remaining in the
> controller. This keeps the I/O's fed without delay.
>
> The net result was instead of receiving, for example, 64 4K sequential
> I/O requests to an eager controller more than willing to accept the
> commands into it's domain, we instead see two 4K I/O requests, followed
> by one 248KB I/O request.
Since you have
./drivers/scsi/aacraid/linit.c: .use_clustering = ENABLE_CLUSTERING,
this smells like a bug or scheduler issue. The block layer should
-already- be coalescing requests.
What happens when you change I/O schedulers? That may be a source of
problems too.
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-20 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-20 19:25 [RFC]: performance improvement by coalescing requests? Salyzyn, Mark
2005-06-20 20:24 ` Jens Axboe
2005-06-20 21:01 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2005-06-20 23:21 ` Bryan Henderson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-06-20 20:48 Salyzyn, Mark
2005-06-21 7:28 ` Jens Axboe
2005-06-21 12:05 Salyzyn, Mark
2005-06-21 12:34 ` Jens Axboe
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=42B72E92.7050306@pobox.com \
--to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark_salyzyn@adaptec.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