From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hugetlbfs: Take read_lock on i_mmap for PMD sharing
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:44:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9c114cb4-cd93-41b5-f123-13815871d659@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191108020337.pyf3ry3zsioh2ghz@linux-p48b>
On 11/7/19 9:03 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Nov 2019, Waiman Long wrote:
>> With this patch applied, the customer is seeing significant performance
>> improvement over the unpatched kernel.
>
> Could you give more details here?
Red Hat has a customer that is running a transactional database
workload. In this particular case, about ~500-1500GB of static hugepages
are allocated. The database then allocates a single large shared memory
segment in those hugepages to use primarily as a database buffer for 8kB
blocks from disk (there are also other database structures in that
shared memory, but it's mostly for buffer). Then thousands of separate
processes reference and load data into that buffer. They were seeing
multi-second pauses when starting up the database.
I first gave them a patched kernel that disabled PMD sharing. That fixed
their problem. After that, I gave them another test kernel that
contained this patch. They said there were significant improved compared
with the unpatched kernel. There is still some degradation compared to
the kernel with huge shared pmd disabled entirely, but they're pretty
close in performance.
Cheer,
Longman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-08 18:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-07 21:18 Waiman Long
2019-11-08 2:03 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-11-08 18:44 ` Waiman Long [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=9c114cb4-cd93-41b5-f123-13815871d659@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.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