Re: [PATCH 29/35] nfs: in-commit pages accounting and wait queue

Wu Fengguang
2010-12-14T15:40:33Z

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 05:15:51AM +0800, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 22:47 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > plain text document attachment (writeback-nfs-in-commit.patch)
> > When doing 10+ concurrent dd's, I observed very bumpy commits submission
> > (partly because the dd's are started at the same time, and hence reached
> > 4MB to-commit pages at the same time). Basically we rely on the server
> > to complete and return write/commit requests, and want both to progress
> > smoothly and not consume too many pages. The write request wait queue is
> > not enough as it's mainly network bounded. So add another commit request
> > wait queue. Only async writes need to sleep on this queue.
> >
>
> I'm not understanding the above reasoning. Why should we serialise
> commits at the per-filesystem level (and only for non-blocking flushes
> at that)?

I did the commit wait queue after seeing this graph, where there is
very bursty pattern of commit submission and hence completion:

http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/wfg/writeback/tests/3G/nfs-100dd-1M-8p-2953M-2.6.37-rc3+-2010-12-03-01/nfs-commit-1000.png

leading to big fluctuations, eg. the almost straight up/straight down
lines below
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/wfg/writeback/tests/3G/nfs-100dd-1M-8p-2953M-2.6.37-rc3+-2010-12-03-01/vmstat-dirty-300.png
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/wfg/writeback/tests/3G/nfs-100dd-1M-8p-2953M-2.6.37-rc3+-2010-12-03-01/dirty-pages.png
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/wfg/writeback/tests/3G/nfs-100dd-1M-8p-2953M-2.6.37-rc3+-2010-12-03-01/dirty-pages-200.png

A commit wait queue will help wipe out the "peaks". The "fixed" graph
is
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/wfg/writeback/tests/3G/nfs-100dd-1M-8p-2952M-2.6.37-rc5+-2010-12-09-03-23/vmstat-dirty-300.png
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/wfg/writeback/tests/3G/nfs-100dd-1M-8p-2952M-2.6.37-rc5+-2010-12-09-03-23/dirty-pages.png

Blocking flushes don't need to wait on this queue because they already
throttle themselves by waiting on the inode commit lock before/after
the commit. They actually should not wait on this queue, to prevent
sync requests being unnecessarily blocked by async ones.

Thanks,
Fengguang