linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@broadcom.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: Reduced latency is killing performance
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 15:56:29 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <db715a3a74c33343f1ac387a30dfcdab@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0d0f1e6f-0f61-c316-8db8-112c4de1d8c9@kernel.dk>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-scsi-
> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Jens Axboe
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 10:18 PM
> To: Hannes Reinecke; Christoph Hellwig
> Cc: SCSI Mailing List; linux-block@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Reduced latency is killing performance
>
> On 11/10/2016 09:04 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > this really feels like a follow-up to the discussion we've had in
> > Santa Fe, but finally I'm able to substantiate it with some numbers.
> >
> > I've made a patch to enable the megaraid_sas driver for multiqueue.
> > While this is pretty straightforward (I'll be sending the patchset
> > later on), the results are ... interesting.
> >
> > I've run the 'ssd-test.fio' script from Jens' repository, and these
> > results for MQ/SQ (- is mq, + is sq):
> >
> >  Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> > -   READ: io=10641MB, aggrb=181503KB/s, minb=181503KB/s,
> > maxb=181503KB/s, mint=60033msec, maxt=60033msec
> > +   READ: io=18370MB, aggrb=312572KB/s, minb=312572KB/s,
> > maxb=312572KB/s, mint=60181msec, maxt=60181msec
> >
> >  Run status group 1 (all jobs):
> > -   READ: io=441444KB, aggrb=7303KB/s, minb=7303KB/s, maxb=7303KB/s,
> > mint=60443msec, maxt=60443msec
> > +   READ: io=223108KB, aggrb=3707KB/s, minb=3707KB/s, maxb=3707KB/s,
> > mint=60182msec, maxt=60182msec
> >
> >  Run status group 2 (all jobs):
> > -  WRITE: io=22485MB, aggrb=383729KB/s, minb=383729KB/s,
> > maxb=383729KB/s, mint=60001msec, maxt=60001msec
> > +  WRITE: io=47421MB, aggrb=807581KB/s, minb=807581KB/s,
> > maxb=807581KB/s, mint=60129msec, maxt=60129msec
> >
> >  Run status group 3 (all jobs):
> > -  WRITE: io=489852KB, aggrb=8110KB/s, minb=8110KB/s, maxb=8110KB/s,
> > mint=60399msec, maxt=60399msec
> > +  WRITE: io=489748KB, aggrb=8134KB/s, minb=8134KB/s, maxb=8134KB/s,
> > mint=60207msec, maxt=60207msec
> >
> >  Disk stats (read/write):
> > -  sda: ios=2834412/5878578, merge=0/0, ticks=86269292/48364836,
> > in_queue=135345876, util=99.20%
> > +  sda: ios=205278/2680329, merge=4552593/9580622,
> > ticks=12539912/12965228, in_queue=25512312, util=99.59%
> >
> > As you can see, we're really losing performance in the multiqueue case.
> > And the main reason for that is that we submit about _10 times_ as
> > much I/O as we do for the single-queue case.
>
> What's the setup like? I'm going to need more details.
>
> The baseline test is using the legacy path, single queue. The new test is
> multiqueue, scsi-mq. What's sda?

Hannes -

Please share setup/config details so that I can also validate and post my
findings.

` Kashyap

>
> > So I guess having an I/O scheduler is critical, even for the scsi-mq
> > case.
>
> Each of these sections is a single job. For some reason we are not merging
> as
> well as we should, that's the reason for the performance loss. In fact,
> we're not
> merging at all. That's not IO scheduling.
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of
> a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at
> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-11 10:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-10 16:04 Reduced latency is killing performance Hannes Reinecke
2016-11-10 16:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-11-10 16:48   ` Jens Axboe
2016-11-10 16:47 ` Jens Axboe
2016-11-11 10:26   ` Kashyap Desai [this message]
2016-11-11  7:02 ` Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory)
2016-11-11 11:39   ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-11-11 17:15 ` Bart Van Assche

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=db715a3a74c33343f1ac387a30dfcdab@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=kashyap.desai@broadcom.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).