public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Smart <James.Smart@Emulex.Com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	SCSI development list <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Problems with the block-layer timeouts
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 09:18:10 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <490F0822.6010406@emulex.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081103085247.GO31673@kernel.dk>

Jens Axboe wrote:
>> While I'm on the subject, there are a few related items that could be
>> improved.  In my tests, I was generating I/O requests simply by doing
>>
>>       dd if=/dev/sda ...
>>
>> I don't know where the timeouts for these requests are determined, but
>> they were set to 60 seconds.  That seems much too long.
> 
> Fully agreed, as Mike mentioned this actually looks like a dumb udev
> rule that didn't have any effect until this generic timeout work. For
> normal IO, something in the 10 second range is a lot more appropriate.

Yes and no. For direct-attach storage with no other initiators, ok. But 
for larger arrays, potentially with multiple initiators - no.  I can 
name several arrays that depend on a 30 second timeout, and a few that, 
underload, require 60 seconds.  I assume that there's usually "best 
practices" guides for the integrators to ensure the defaults are set right.

-- james s

  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-03 14:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-01 16:54 Problems with the block-layer timeouts Alan Stern
2008-11-02 20:35 ` Mike Anderson
2008-11-03  8:52 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-03 14:18   ` James Smart [this message]
2008-11-03 17:23     ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-03 15:59   ` Alan Stern
2008-11-03 16:39     ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-03 17:07       ` Alan Stern
2008-11-03 17:27       ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-04  3:01         ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-06  0:01   ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-06  7:23     ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-07  4:05       ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-07 11:24         ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11  6:54           ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-11 17:11             ` Alan Stern
2008-11-11 19:19               ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-12  2:08                 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-13 10:34                   ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-17  3:48                     ` FUJITA Tomonori

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=490F0822.6010406@emulex.com \
    --to=james.smart@emulex.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.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