From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Martin Peschke <mp3@de.ibm.com>
Cc: psusi@cfl.rr.com, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/5] I/O statistics through request queues
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:11:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061026191154.GG4978@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4540D61B.5040802@de.ibm.com>
HI -
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 05:36:59PM +0200, Martin Peschke wrote:
> [...] I meant scaling with regard to lots of different keys. This
> is what you have described as "By 'rows'", isn't it?
Yes.
> For example, if I wanted to store a timestamp for each request
> issued, and there were lots of devices and the I/O was driving the
> system crazy - how would affect that lookup time?
If you have only hundreds or thousands of such requests on the go
at any given time, that's not a problem. Hash by pointer.
> [...] I would be done with that lookup table entry then. But it
> won't go away, will it? Is this an issue?
The entry can be instantly cleared for reuse by another future
key-value pair. Think of it like a mini slab cache.
> [...] Anyway, I think this discussion shows that any dynamically
> added client of kernel markers which needs to hold extra data for
> entities like requests might be difficult to be implemented
> efficiently (compared to static instrumentation), because markers,
> by nature, only allow for code additions, but not for additions to
> existing data structures.
It's a question that mixes quantitative and policy matters. It's
certainly *somewhat* slower to store data on the side, but whether in
the context of the event source that is okay or not Just Depends. On
the flip side, patching in hard-coded extra data storage for busy
structures also has a cost if the statistics gathering is not actually
requested by the end-user. (On the policy side, one must weigh to
what extent it's reasonable to pad more and more data structures, just
in case.)
- FChE
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-26 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-21 12:57 Martin Peschke
2006-10-23 11:37 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-23 18:11 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-23 20:02 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-24 16:02 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-24 16:20 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-24 20:38 ` Phillip Susi
2006-10-24 22:27 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-25 17:50 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-10-26 11:07 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-26 12:13 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-10-26 13:37 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-26 14:02 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-10-26 15:36 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-26 19:11 ` Frank Ch. Eigler [this message]
2006-10-24 23:04 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-25 5:12 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-25 10:32 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-25 10:42 ` Jens Axboe
2006-11-02 14:39 ` martin
2006-11-02 14:46 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-23 18:39 ` Phillip Susi
2006-10-24 16:05 ` Martin Peschke
2006-10-24 20:44 ` Phillip Susi
2006-10-24 22:49 ` Martin Peschke
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=20061026191154.GG4978@redhat.com \
--to=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mp3@de.ibm.com \
--cc=psusi@cfl.rr.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
Powered by JetHome