From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@fastmq.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Martin Lucina <mato@kotelna.sk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Higher than expected disk write(2) latency
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 06:18:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080710061822.38975133.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48760BFB.90007@fastmq.com>
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:17:47 +0200 Martin Sustrik <sustrik@fastmq.com> wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> >> What we see is that AIO performs rather bad while we are still
> >> enqueueing more writes (it misses right position on the disk and has to
> >> do superfluous disk revolvings), however, once we stop enqueueing new
> >> write request, those already in the queue are processed swiftly.
> >
> > Which disk scheduler are you using - some of the disk schedulers
> > intentionally delay writes to try and get better block merging.
>
> It's CFQ. Does it delay writes? And if so, what should we use instead?
>
noop is the simplest scheduler. deadline is the simplest real scheduler,
and deadline doesn't have any delaying logic.
If CFQ or anticipatory _are_ putting delays into this workload, that'd be
a bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-10 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-28 12:11 Higher than expected disk write(2) latency Martin Lucina
2008-06-28 13:11 ` Roger Heflin
2008-06-30 18:10 ` Martin Sustrik
2008-06-30 19:02 ` Roger Heflin
2008-06-30 22:20 ` Martin Sustrik
2008-07-01 0:11 ` Bernd Eckenfels
2008-07-02 16:48 ` Martin Sustrik
2008-07-02 18:15 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-07-02 18:20 ` Martin Sustrik
2008-07-04 3:16 ` David Dillow
2008-07-02 21:33 ` Roger Heflin
2008-06-28 14:47 ` David Newall
2008-06-29 11:34 ` Martin Sustrik
2008-07-10 5:27 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-10 8:12 ` Martin Sustrik
2008-07-10 8:14 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-10 13:29 ` Chris Mason
2008-07-10 13:41 ` Martin Lucina
2008-07-10 14:01 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-07-10 14:18 ` Chris Mason
2008-07-10 8:31 ` Alan Cox
2008-07-10 13:17 ` Martin Sustrik
2008-07-10 13:18 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-07-11 15:17 ` Martin Sustrik
[not found] <fa.OZMA74BZPX46rhnjz1am4hB786M@ifi.uio.no>
2008-06-30 6:41 ` Robert Hancock
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=20080710061822.38975133.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mato@kotelna.sk \
--cc=sustrik@fastmq.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