From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>,
Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfq-iosched: NCQ SSDs do not need read queue merging
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:24:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100111132402.GE4489@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B4B250D.8020205@garzik.org>
On Mon, Jan 11 2010, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On 01/11/2010 08:13 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 11 2010, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Jeff Garzik<jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
>>>> On 01/10/2010 04:04 PM, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> NCQ SSDs' performances are not affected by
>>>>> distance of read requests, so there is no point in having
>>>>> overhead to merge such queues.
>>>>>
>>>>> Non-NCQ SSDs showed regression in some special cases, so
>>>>> they are ruled out by this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch intentionally doesn't affect writes, so
>>>>> it changes the queued[] field, to be indexed by
>>>>> READ/WRITE instead of SYNC/ASYNC, and only compute proximity
>>>>> for queues with WRITE requests.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Corrado Zoccolo<czoccolo@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> That's not really true. Overhead always increases as the total number of
>>>> ATA commands issued increases.
>>>
>>> Jeff Moyer tested the patch on the workload that mostly benefit of
>>> queue merging, and found that
>>> the performance was improved by the patch.
>>> So removing the CPU overhead helps much more than the marginal gain
>>> given by merging on this hardware.
>>
>> It's not always going to be true. On SATA the command overhead is fairly
>> low, but on other hardware that may not be the case. Unless you are CPU
>> bound by your IO device, then merging will always be beneficial. I'm a
>> little behind on emails after my vacation, Jeff what numbers did you
>> generate and on what hardware?
>
> ...and on what workload? "the workload that mostly benefit of queue
> merging" is highly subjective, and likely does not cover most workloads
> SSDs will see in the field.
That, too. The queue merging it not exactly cheap, so perhaps we can
work on making that work better as well. I've got some new hardware in
the bag that'll do IOPS in the millions range, so I'll throw some tests
at it too once I get it cabled up.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-11 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-30 12:10 [PATCH] cfq-iosched: non-rot devices do not need queue merging Corrado Zoccolo
2009-12-30 18:45 ` Jens Axboe
2009-12-30 20:31 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-12-30 21:11 ` Jens Axboe
2009-12-30 21:21 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-12-30 21:34 ` Jens Axboe
2009-12-30 22:22 ` [PATCH] cfq-iosched: non-rot devices do not need read " Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-04 14:47 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-04 16:36 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-04 16:51 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-01-04 18:32 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-04 18:37 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-04 18:51 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-04 19:04 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-01-04 20:37 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-05 14:58 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-01-05 15:13 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-05 21:19 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-01-05 21:48 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-07 10:56 ` Kirill Afonshin
2010-01-07 13:38 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-07 14:36 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-07 17:00 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-07 18:37 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-07 20:16 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-08 18:53 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-10 12:55 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-10 21:04 ` [PATCH] cfq-iosched: NCQ SSDs " Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-10 21:08 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-11 11:25 ` Jeff Garzik
2010-01-11 12:26 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-11 13:13 ` Jens Axboe
2010-01-11 13:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2010-01-11 13:24 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2010-01-11 14:53 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-11 16:44 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-11 17:00 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-11 17:07 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-11 19:05 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-01-11 17:11 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-01-11 19:09 ` Corrado Zoccolo
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=20100111132402.GE4489@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
--cc=guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).