From: "Alan D. Brunelle" <Alan.Brunelle@hp.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zach.brown@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Page based O_DIRECT v2
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:12:07 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1250809927.5738.77.camel@cail> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090820104000.GH12579@kernel.dk>
On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 12:40 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19 2009, Alan D. Brunelle wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 00:06 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot for the test run, Alan. I wonder why writes are down while
> > > reads are up. One possibility could be a WRITE vs WRITE_ODIRECT
> > > difference, though I think they should be the same. The patches I posted
> > > have not been benchmarked at all, it's still very much a work in
> > > progress. I just wanted to show the general direction that I thought
> > > would be interesting. So I have done absolutely zero performance
> > > testing, it's only been tested for whether it still worked or not (to
> > > some degree :-)...
> > > lib
> > > I'll poke a bit at it here, too. I want to finish the unplug/wait
> > > problem first. Is your test case using read/write or readv/writev?
> > >
> >
> > Hi Jens - I just had some extra cycles, so figured what the heck... :-)
> >
> > Actually, this is using asynchronous direct I/Os (libaio/Linux native
> > AIO). If I get a chance tomorrow, I'll play with read/write (and/or
> > readv/writev).
>
> OK, then I wonder what the heck is up... Did you catch any io metrics?
>
Hi Jens -
Took a different tack: Using FIO, I put it through its paces using the
following variables:
kernels: 2.6.31-rc6 / 2.6.31-rc6 + loop-direct git branch
I/O direction: read / write
Seek behavior: sequential / random
FIO engines (modes): libaio / posixaio / psync / sync / vsync
I/O size: 4K / 16K / 64K / 256K
Up at http://free.linux.hp.com/~adb/2009-08-20/bench_modes.png I have a
(very large) .png with all the data present - left column shows
throughput (as measured by FIO), right column has %user + %system (as
measured by FIO). To view this, download the .png & run 'eog' (or
whatever your favorite .png viewer is), blow it up and scroll down to
see the 20 pairs of graphs.
The 2.6.31-rc6 kernel data is in red, the loop-direct results are in
blue.
It's showing some strange things at this point - The most scary thing is
certainly the random & sequential writes using posixaio - HUGE drops in
performance with the loop-direct branch. But, for some reason, random
write's using libaio look better with your loop-direct branch.
In http://free.linux.hp.com/~adb/2009-08-20/data.tar.bz2 I have /all/
the FIO job-files & FIO output files used to generate these graphs.
I've got some scripts to automate doing these runs & generating the
graphs, so I'm all primed to continue testing this with future versions
of this patch sequence. (I can easily automate it to utilize iostat
and/or blktrace if you'd like (need?) that data as well.) (It only takes
about 4 hours (plus reboot time) to do this, so it's not a big deal.)
Alan D. Brunelle
Hewlett-Packard
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-20 23:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-18 8:34 [PATCH 0/4] Page based O_DIRECT v2 Jens Axboe
2009-08-18 8:34 ` [PATCH 1/4] direct-io: unify argument passing by adding a dio_args structure Jens Axboe
2009-08-18 8:34 ` [PATCH 2/4] direct-io: make O_DIRECT IO path be page based Jens Axboe
2009-08-18 8:35 ` [PATCH 3/4] direct-io: add a "IO for kernel" flag to kiocb Jens Axboe
2009-08-18 8:35 ` [PATCH 4/4] direct-io: get rid of irq flag saving where it isn't needed Jens Axboe
2009-08-19 12:44 ` [PATCH 0/4] Page based O_DIRECT v2 Boaz Harrosh
2009-08-19 13:01 ` Jens Axboe
2009-08-19 19:05 ` Alan D. Brunelle
2009-08-19 22:06 ` Jens Axboe
2009-08-19 22:23 ` Alan D. Brunelle
2009-08-20 10:40 ` Jens Axboe
2009-08-20 23:12 ` Alan D. Brunelle [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=1250809927.5738.77.camel@cail \
--to=alan.brunelle@hp.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zach.brown@oracle.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