mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
To: Ralf Gross <rg@stz-softwaretechnik.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: io-scheduler tuning for better read/write ratio
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:43:17 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <x49fxdsl46y.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49d494c4u0.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com> (Jeff Moyer's message of "Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:16:07 -0400")

Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com> writes:

> Ralf Gross <rg@stz-softwaretechnik.com> writes:
>
>> Casey Dahlin schrieb:
>>> On 06/16/2009 02:40 PM, Ralf Gross wrote:
>>> > David Newall schrieb:
>>> >> Ralf Gross wrote:
>>> >>> write throughput is much higher than the read throughput (40 MB/s
>>> >>> read, 90 MB/s write).
>>> > 
>>> > Hm, but I get higher read throughput (160-200 MB/s) if I don't write
>>> > to the device at the same time.
>>> > 
>>> > Ralf
>>> 
>>> How specifically are you testing? It could depend a lot on the
>>> particular access patterns you're using to test.
>>
>> I did the basic tests with tiobench. The real test is a test backup
>> (bacula) with 2 jobs that create 2 30 GB spool files on that device.
>> The jobs partially write to the device in parallel. Depending which
>> spool file reaches the 30 GB first, one starts reading from that file
>> and writing to tape, while to other is still spooling.
>
> We are missing a lot of details, here.  I guess the first thing I'd try
> would be bumping up the max_readahead_kb parameter, since I'm guessing
> that your backup application isn't driving very deep queue depths.  If
> that doesn't work, then please provide exact invocations of tiobench
> that reprduce the problem or some blktrace output for your real test.

Any news, Ralf?

Cheers,
Jeff

  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-22 14:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-16 15:43 Ralf Gross
2009-06-16 16:41 ` David Newall
2009-06-16 18:40   ` Ralf Gross
2009-06-16 18:43     ` Casey Dahlin
2009-06-16 18:56       ` Ralf Gross
2009-06-16 20:16         ` Jeff Moyer
2009-06-22 14:43           ` Jeff Moyer [this message]
2009-06-22 16:31             ` Ralf Gross
2009-06-22 19:42               ` Jeff Moyer
2009-06-23  7:24                 ` Ralf Gross
2009-06-23 13:53                   ` Jeff Moyer
2009-06-24  7:25                     ` Ralf Gross
2009-06-24  7:57                       ` Al Boldi
2009-06-25  7:26                         ` Ralf Gross
2009-06-25 13:45                           ` Al Boldi
2009-06-25  7:27                         ` Ralf Gross
2009-06-26  2:19                 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-06-26 10:44                   ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-27  3:46                     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-06-29  9:47                       ` Ralf Gross

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=x49fxdsl46y.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com \
    --to=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rg@stz-softwaretechnik.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®