public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@fastmq.com>
To: Roger Heflin <rogerheflin@gmail.com>
Cc: Martin Lucina <mato@kotelna.sk>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Higher than expected disk write(2) latency
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:20:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48695C20.6050704@fastmq.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48692DC0.6060904@gmail.com>

Hi Roger,

>> Fair enough. That exaplains the behaviour. Would AIO help here? If we 
>> are able to enqueue next write before the first one is finished, it 
>> can start writing it immediately without waiting for a revolution.
> 
> If you could get them queued at the disk level, things that would need 
> to be watched were if the disk can queue things up (and all 
> controllers/drivers support it), and how many things the disk can queue 
> up, and how large each of those things can be, if they aren't queued at 
> the disk, there is the chance that the machine cannot get the data to 
> the disk faster enough for that next sector.

We'll try with AIO and we'll see what the impact would be.

> Depending on your application you could always get a small fast solid 
> state device (no seek or RPM issues), and use it to keep a journal that 
> could be replayed on an unexpected crash...and then just use various 
> syncs to force things to disk at various points.

Yes, that's one thing we want to do. However, we cannot assume that 
every user will have SSD, thus we should try to get the best latencies 
possible even on standard HD.

Martin

  reply	other threads:[~2008-06-30 22:20 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 [this message]
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
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=48695C20.6050704@fastmq.com \
    --to=sustrik@fastmq.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mato@kotelna.sk \
    --cc=rogerheflin@gmail.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