From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] reduce exclusive ilock hold times
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:08:37 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120327060837.GX5091@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120326211421.518374058@bombadil.infradead.org>
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 05:14:21PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> This series tries to reduce the amount we hold the ilock exclusively,
> especially during direct I/O writes where they currently hurt us.
>
> Dave showed that his earlier version which is less aggressive than this
> one can already provide magnitudes of better throughput and iops for
> parallel direct I/O workloads, and this one should be even better.
Shows the same results for the recent sysbench testing as my patch,
but that is CPU bound and so there is little scope for improvement.
It is showing about 4.9GB/s as the maximum write rate with 16k IOs.
I get similar results from the rrtest code that was previously used
to demonstrate this problem - it's showing about about 1.2 million
4k IOPS, which is about 4.8GB/s as well. I think that must be the
limit of what the ramdisk code can handle on my setup.
So the performance side of this works just fine.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-27 6:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-26 21:14 [PATCH 0/5] reduce exclusive ilock hold times Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-26 21:14 ` [PATCH 1/5] xfs: avoid taking the ilock unnessecarily in xfs_qm_dqattach Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-26 22:13 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-26 21:14 ` [PATCH 2/5] xfs: reduce ilock hold times in xfs_file_aio_write_checks Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-26 22:15 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-26 21:14 ` [PATCH 3/5] xfs: reduce ilock hold times in xfs_setattr_size Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-26 22:17 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-26 21:14 ` [PATCH 4/5] xfs: push the ilock into xfs_zero_eof Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-27 1:15 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-27 5:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-27 6:11 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-26 21:14 ` [PATCH 5/5] xfs: use shared ilock mode for direct IO writes by default Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-27 1:39 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-27 6:08 ` Dave Chinner [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=20120327060837.GX5091@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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