From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, jmoyer@redhat.com,
Kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] block: proportional based blk-throttling
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 09:43:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160122144334.GC9499@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160121224157.GL5157@mtj.duckdns.org>
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 05:41:57PM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
[..]
> A simple approximation of IO cost such as fixed cost
> per IO + cost proportional to IO size would do a far better job than
> just depending on bandwidth or iops and that requires approximating
> two variables over time. I'm not sure how easy / feasible that
> actually would be tho.
Hi Tejun,
"A fixed cost per IO sounds" like iops and "cost proportional to IO size"
sounds like bandwidth. I am wondering can we dynamically control both
bps and iops rate of cgroup based on cgroup weight and average bw/iops of
device queue. That way a cgroup can not get unfair share of disk neither
by throwing lots of small IOs, nor by sending down a small number of large
IOs.
Will that be good enough.
Thanks
Vivek
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-22 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-20 17:49 [RFC 0/3] block: proportional based blk-throttling Shaohua Li
2016-01-20 17:49 ` [RFC 1/3] block: estimate disk bandwidth Shaohua Li
2016-01-20 17:49 ` [RFC 2/3] blk-throttling: weight based throttling Shaohua Li
2016-01-21 20:33 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-21 21:00 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-20 17:49 ` [RFC 3/3] blk-throttling: detect inactive cgroup Shaohua Li
2016-01-21 20:44 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-21 21:05 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-21 21:09 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-20 19:05 ` [RFC 0/3] block: proportional based blk-throttling Vivek Goyal
2016-01-20 19:34 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-20 19:40 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-20 19:43 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-20 19:54 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-20 21:11 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-20 21:34 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-21 21:10 ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-21 22:24 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-21 22:41 ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-22 0:00 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-22 14:48 ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-22 15:52 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-22 18:00 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-22 19:09 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-22 19:45 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-22 20:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2016-01-22 17:57 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-22 18:08 ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-22 19:11 ` Shaohua Li
2016-01-22 14:43 ` Vivek Goyal [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=20160122144334.GC9499@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@fb.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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).