From: Ben Gamari <bgamari.foss@gmail.com>
To: tytso@mit.edu
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Olly Betts <olly@survex.com>,
martin f krafft <madduck@madduck.net>
Subject: Re: Poor interactive performance with I/O loads with fsync()ing
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:18:09 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ba049f1.017ee70a.5ce6.1456@mx.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100317012439.GA8256@thunk.org>
Sorry about the lack of any useful information in my initial email.
I clearly didn't read it before sending.
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:24:39 -0400, tytso@mit.edu wrote:
> What kernel version are you using; what distribution and what version
> of that distro are you running; what file system are you using and
> what if any mount options are you using? And what kind of hard drives
> do you have?
While this problem has been around for some time, my current configuration
is the following:
Kernel 2.6.32 (although also reproducible with kernels at least as early as 2.6.28)
Filesystem: Now Btrfs (was ext4 less than a week ago), default mount options
Hard drive: Seagate Momentus 7200.4 (ST9500420AS)
Distribution: Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic)
>
> I'm going to assume you're running into the standard ext3
> "data=ordered" entagled writes problem. There are solutions, such as
> switching to using ext4, mounting with data=writeback mode, but they
> have various shortcomings.
>
Unfortunately several people have continued to encounter unacceptable
latency, even with ext4 and data=writeback.
> A number of improvements have been made in ext3 and ext4 since some of
> the discussions you quoted, but since you didn't tell us what
> distribution version and/or what kernel version you are using, we
> can't tell you are using those newer improvements yet.
>
Sorry about that. I should know better by now.
- Ben
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-17 3:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-16 15:31 Poor interactive performance with I/O loads with fsync()ing Ben Gamari
2010-03-17 1:24 ` tytso
2010-03-17 3:18 ` Ben Gamari [this message]
2010-03-17 3:30 ` tytso
2010-03-17 4:31 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-26 3:16 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-17 4:53 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-17 9:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-26 3:31 ` Ben Gamari
2010-04-09 15:21 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-26 3:28 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-23 19:51 ` Jesper Krogh
2010-03-26 3:13 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-28 1:20 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-28 1:29 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-28 3:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-03-28 14:06 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-28 22:08 ` Andi Kleen
2010-04-09 14:56 ` Ben Gamari
2010-04-11 15:03 ` Avi Kivity
2010-04-11 16:35 ` Ben Gamari
2010-04-11 17:20 ` Andi Kleen
2010-04-11 18:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-04-11 18:42 ` Andi Kleen
2010-04-11 21:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-04-11 23:43 ` Hans-Peter Jansen
2010-04-12 0:22 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-14 18:40 ` Ric Wheeler
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-23 11:28 Pawel S
2010-03-23 13:27 ` Jens Axboe
2010-03-26 3:35 ` Ben Gamari
2010-03-30 10:46 ` Pawel S
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=4ba049f1.017ee70a.5ce6.1456@mx.google.com \
--to=bgamari.foss@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=madduck@madduck.net \
--cc=olly@survex.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.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