From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762143Ab2ERGvM (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 May 2012 02:51:12 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:47307 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760342Ab2ERGvK (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 May 2012 02:51:10 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 08:50:51 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner , Mel Gorman , Minchan Kim , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: consider all swapped back pages in used-once logic Message-ID: <20120518065051.GA23173@tiehlicka.suse.cz> References: <1337246033-13719-1-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz> <20120517022412.9175f604.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20120517121049.GA11018@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <20120517132324.e9bf9fc8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120517132324.e9bf9fc8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 17-05-12 13:23:24, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 17 May 2012 14:10:49 +0200 > Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > This patch fixes a regression introduced by this commit for heavy shmem > > > > > > A performance regression, specifically. > > > > > > Are you able to quantify it? > > > > The customer's workload is shmem backed database (80% of RAM) and > > they are measuring transactions/s with an IO in the background (20%). > > Transactions touch more or less random rows in the table. > > The rate goes down drastically when we start swapping out memory. > > > > Numbers are more descriptive (without the patch is 100%, with 5 > > representative runs) > > Average rate 315.83% > > Best rate 131.76% > > Worst rate 641.25% > > > > Standard deviation (calibrated to average) is ~4% while without the > > patch we are at 62.82%. > > The big variance without the patch is caused by the excessive swapping > > which doesn't occur with the patch applied. > > > > * Worst run (100%) compared to a random run with the patch > > pgpgin pswpin pswpout pgmajfault > > 1.58% 0.00% 0.01% 0.22% > > > > Average size of the LRU lists: > > nr_inactive_anon nr_active_anon nr_inactive_file nr_active_file > > 52.91% 7234.72% 249.39% 126.64% > > > > * Best run > > pgpgin pswpin pswpout pgmajfault > > 3.37% 0.00% 0.11% 0.39% > > > > nr_inactive_anon nr_active_anon nr_inactive_file nr_active_file > > 49.85% 3868.74% 175.03% 121.27% > > I turned the above into this soundbite: > > : The customer's workload is shmem backed database (80% of RAM) and they are > : measuring transactions/s with an IO in the background (20%). Transactions > : touch more or less random rows in the table. Total runtime was > : approximately tripled by commit 64574746 and this patch restores the > : previous throughput levels. > > Was that truthful? Total runtime was same for all the runs. It is the number of executed transactions that was measured. I guess that what you wrote should be more or less equivalent but it's is not what I have numbers for. How about: " Total number of transactions went down 3 times (in the worst case) because of commit 64574746. This patch restores the previous numbers. " Thanks -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs SUSE LINUX s.r.o. Lihovarska 1060/12 190 00 Praha 9 Czech Republic