From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
npiggin@suse.de
Subject: Re: Commit 31a12666d8f0c22235297e1c1575f82061480029 slows down Berkeley DB
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 14:40:41 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200902051440.42176.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1233677565.7246.15.camel@think.oraclecorp.com>
On Wednesday 04 February 2009 03:12:45 Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 13:11 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > The interesting thing is why is this causing such a slowdown. If there is
> > only a single main file active in the workload, then I don't see why this
> > patch should make such a big difference. In either case, wouldn't pdflush
> > come back and just start writing out from the start of the file anyway?
>
> Perhaps the difference is that without the patch, pdflush will return
> after running congestion_wait()? This would give bdb and iozone a
> chance to fill in more pages, and increases the chances we'll do
> sequential IO.
That's a possible explanation. I'll do some iozone runs and see if I can
work out what's going on. If we can distill the "goodness" of the previous
offset-wrap behaviour without reverting to make writeout more offset
dependent, that would be nice -- it might even benefit other cases that
weren't previously hitting the offset wrap case.
Worst case, if we can't come up with something simple and obvious for 2.6.29,
we can restore the old behaviour until we can come up with something better.
Thanks,
Nick
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-05 3:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-30 1:23 Jan Kara
2009-02-03 1:24 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-03 1:54 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-02-03 2:11 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-03 16:12 ` Chris Mason
2009-02-05 3:40 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
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=200902051440.42176.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®