From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
To: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>
Cc: jens.axboe@oracle.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch,rfc] cfq: merge cooperating cfq_queues
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:06:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <x4963a2yz3a.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4e5e476b0910220145t300fe3fbo6ca7b623214d0a20@mail.gmail.com> (Corrado Zoccolo's message of "Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:45:34 +0200")
Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:09 AM, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com> wrote:
>> I think it's wrong to call the userspace programs broken. They worked
>> fine when CFQ was quantum based, and they work well with noop and
>> deadline.
>
> So they didn't work well with anticipatory, that was the default from
> 2.6.0 to 2.6.17, and with CFQ with time slices, that was the default
> from 2.6.18 up to now. I think enough time has passed to start fixing
> those programs.
I actually didn't test anticipatory, so I'm not sure about that one.
> I think fixing nfsd at least for TCP should be easy. In TCP case, each
> client has a private thread pool, so you can just share the I/O
> context once, when creating those threads, and forget it.
I don't think it's a thread pool per client. Where did you get that
impression? Simply changing nfsd to use a single I/O context may be an
approachable solution to the problem. I'm not sure if it's optimal, but
it has to be better than what we have today.
> For the UDP case, would just reducing idle window fix the problem? Or
> the problem is not really the idling, but the bad I/O pattern?
I think the two cases can be handled the same way. I'll look into it if
time permits.
Cheers,
Jeff
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-26 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-20 18:23 Jeff Moyer
2009-10-21 21:33 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-10-22 0:09 ` Jeff Moyer
2009-10-22 8:45 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-10-26 15:06 ` Jeff Moyer [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=x4963a2yz3a.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com \
--to=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®