From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: tytso@mit.edu, torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 15:13:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090406131330.GZ5178@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090406130414.GX5178@kernel.dk>
On Mon, Apr 06 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is a set of patches that I worked on today in the hopes
> > of furthering the latency goals and at least fixing some of
> > the write regression with fwrite + fsync that current -git
> > is suffering from.
> >
> > I haven't done any latency tests yet, I'm just tossing this
> > out there so we can collaborate on improving things. What I
> > did test was the silly fwrite() + fsync() loop test, which
> > is a LOT slower in current -git that it used to be. The test
> > is basically:
> >
> > while (nr--) {
> > f = fopen();
> > fprintf(f, "Some data here\n");
> > fsync(fileno(f));
> > fclose(f);
> > }
> >
> > which (for nr == 2000) takes 16 seconds in -git, completes
> > in 0.9s with the patches.
>
> Ran the fsync-tester [1]. Drive is a 3-4 years old SATA drive, fs is
> ext3/writeback. IO scheduler is CFQ.
>
> fsync time: 0.0402s
> fsync time: 0.6572s
> fsync time: 0.3187s
> fsync time: 0.2901s
> fsync time: 0.1478s
> fsync time: 0.4158s
> fsync time: 0.2815s
> fsync time: 0.3216s
> fsync time: 0.1604s
> fsync time: 0.1929s
> fsync time: 0.2413s
> fsync time: 0.2138s
> fsync time: 0.2441s
> fsync time: 0.2785s
> fsync time: 0.2640s
>
> And with Linus torture dd running in the background:
>
> fsync time: 0.0109s
> fsync time: 0.5236s
> fsync time: 1.2108s
> fsync time: 0.2999s
> fsync time: 1.5286s
> fsync time: 0.2549s
> fsync time: 0.4164s
> fsync time: 1.1586s
> fsync time: 1.6630s
> fsync time: 0.6949s
> fsync time: 1.0102s
> fsync time: 0.3715s
> fsync time: 0.6553s
And here is that latter test again with NCQ disabled on the drive:
fsync time: 0.0092s
fsync time: 0.7815s
fsync time: 0.6490s
fsync time: 0.7894s
fsync time: 0.5385s
fsync time: 0.6598s
fsync time: 0.7701s
fsync time: 0.2155s
fsync time: 0.0901s
fsync time: 0.2765s
fsync time: 0.2879s
fsync time: 0.2882s
fsync time: 0.2457s
fsync time: 0.4319s
fsync time: 0.3752s
It stays nicely below 1s.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-06 13:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-06 12:48 [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 1/8] block: change the request allocation/congestion logic to be sync/async based Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 2/8] Add WRITE_SYNC_PLUG and SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 3/8] block: fsync_buffers_list() should use SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 4/8] jbd: use WRITE_SYNC_PLUG instead of WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 5/8] jbd2: " Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 6/8] block: enabling plugging on SSD devices that don't do queuing Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 7/8] block: Add flag for telling the IO schedulers NOT to anticipate more IO Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 8/8] block: switch sync_dirty_buffer() over to WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:04 ` [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:13 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-04-06 15:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 16:57 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-07 3:28 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-06 15:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 15:10 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 17:01 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 18:31 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:26 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 20:12 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:19 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 21:35 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:04 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 23:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 7:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2009-04-07 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-07 14:10 ` Diego Calleja
2009-04-08 12:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-08 12:56 ` Denys Vlasenko
2009-04-08 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-07 13:35 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 14:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 19:24 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 19:45 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-04-07 20:53 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-04-09 2:40 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-04-09 14:01 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-04-06 22:25 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:48 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:52 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 23:19 ` Alan Cox
2009-04-07 3:52 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-07 4:13 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 4:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 4:48 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 5:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 5:23 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-07 6:27 ` Trenton D. Adams
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=20090406131330.GZ5178@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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