public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lutz Vieweg <lvml@5t9.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED causing excessive amounts of block I/O
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 19:48:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <jvu8oq$8sl$1@dough.gmane.org> (raw)

I recently investigated the I/O performance of some software and
noticed that "iotop" and "pidstat -d" reported way more write activity
than the application could ever have written.

Further investigation revealed that the application was using
posix_fadvise(..., POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED) on regions of a file it
just wrote - which seems reasonable given that the data in question
is not expected to be read by this or any other application soon,
and the manual page of posix_fadvise states:

 > The advice is not binding; it merely constitutes an expectation on behalf of the application.
...
 >      POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED
 >              The specified data will not be accessed in the near future.

The regions that the application used posix_fadvise() on where often smaller
than one page (4096 byte), but it seems as if the kernel (3.5.0) triggers an immediate
write out of a whole page for each call to posix_fadvise(), causing lots
of unneccessary I/O.

You can reproduce the effect by running the following tiny C program, while
you run "iotop"/"pidstat -d 1"/"iostat -dx 1" on the same system:

#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <unistd.h>

int main(int argc, char ** argv) {

     int fd;
     off_t i;
     char c = 0;

     fd = open("dummytestfile", O_WRONLY | O_CREAT | O_TRUNC, 0777);

     for (i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
          write(fd, &c, 1);
          posix_fadvise(fd, i, 1, POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED);

          usleep(1000);
     }

     close(fd);

     return 0;
}

This program writes no more than 10.000 bytes over a period of 10 seconds, but
the utilities report that it writes ~ 2 Megabytes per second!

I would have expected that posix_fadvise(..., POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED) just marks
a dirty page such that it is written out the next time it's convenient for the
I/O scheduler - but the multiplication of actual I/O is certainly not what the
application programmer could have expected, given the documentation of
posix_fadvise...

Regards,

Lutz Vieweg


                 reply	other threads:[~2012-08-08 17:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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='jvu8oq$8sl$1@dough.gmane.org' \
    --to=lvml@5t9.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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