From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Tatyana Brokhman <tlinder@codeaurora.org>,
axboe@kernel.dk, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/2] block: Adding ROW scheduling algorithm
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 07:29:29 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1209190718030.29967@nerf07.vanv.qr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49wr1cdlmg.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
On Monday 2012-08-06 18:35, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>Tatyana Brokhman writes:
>
>> This patch adds the implementation of a new scheduling algorithm - ROW.
>> The policy of this algorithm is to prioritize READ requests over WRITE
>> as much as possible without starving the WRITE requests.
>
>Perhaps you could start off by describing the workload, and describing
>why the existing I/O schedulers do not perform well.
My setup is a 1 GB RAM Atom N450 netbook, combined with the use of
dm-crypt for the 5400 rpm disk, which limits the effective write
throughput to somewhere around 20–26 MB/s. Now try this:
ddrescue /dev/zero ~/bluntfile (or)
(remote)# >nullfile
(remote)# truncate -s 10G nullfile
(local)# rsync -HPavz remote:nullfile .
The transfer rates of ddrescue/rsync first show 50–60 MB/s. Wait
until writeout is forced - which is after ~700–800 MB in my case when
all buffers are full. The transfer rates then drop to the
aforementioned 20–26 MB/s.
In the so-loaded system, try to start an xterm (preferably by the use
of a shortcut, or starting one from another xterm). The wait time for
the shell prompt to appear is then the measure for interactivity,
with lower being better.
I have casually observed that ROW has 1/4th of the wait time in this
heavy disk write scenario (around 5 s) for the shell to start up than
with CFQ (20–21 s). "Casual" meaning I had a clock with 1.0 s
granularity beside me and ran this for like 3 times for each
scheduler, averaging it out.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-19 5:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1344166241-18708-1-git-send-email-tlinder@codeaurora.org>
2012-08-05 11:30 ` [RFC/PATCH 1/2] block: Expose kblock_schedule_delayed_work() Tatyana Brokhman
2012-08-05 11:30 ` [RFC/PATCH 2/2] block: Adding ROW scheduling algorithm Tatyana Brokhman
2012-08-06 16:35 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-08-07 11:28 ` Tanya Brokhman
2012-09-19 5:29 ` Jan Engelhardt [this message]
2012-09-21 4:35 ` Jan Engelhardt
2012-09-21 4:58 ` Tanya Brokhman
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=alpine.LNX.2.01.1209190718030.29967@nerf07.vanv.qr \
--to=jengelh@inai.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tlinder@codeaurora.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®