linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: write-behind on streaming writes
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 20:14:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyxucvhYhbk0yyNa1WSeYXgHHAyWRHPNWDwODQhyAWGww@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120606025729.GA1197@redhat.com>

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> I had expected a bigger difference as sync_file_range() is just driving
> max queue depth of 32 (total 16MB IO in flight), while flushers are
> driving queue depths up to 140 or so. So in this paritcular test, driving
> much deeper queue depths is not really helping much. (I have seen higher
> throughputs with higher queue depths in the past. Now sure why don't we
> see it here).

How did interactivity feel?

Because quite frankly, if the throughput difference is 12.5 vs 12
seconds, I suspect the interactivity thing is what dominates.

And from my memory of the interactivity different was absolutely
*huge*. Even back when I used rotational media, I basically couldn't
even notice the background write with the sync_file_range() approach.
While the regular writeback without the writebehind had absolutely
*huge* pauses if you used something like firefox that uses fsync()
etc. And starting new applications that weren't cached was noticeably
worse too - and then with sync_file_range it wasn't even all that
noticeable.

NOTE! For the real "firefox + fsync" test, I suspect you'd need to do
the writeback on the same filesystem (and obviously disk) as your home
directory is. If the big write is to another filesystem and another
disk, I think you won't see the same issues.

Admittedly, I have not really touched anything with a rotational disk
for the last few years, nor do I ever want to see those rotating
pieces of high-tech rust ever again. And maybe your SAN has so good
latency even under load that it doesn't really matter. I remember it
mattering a lot back when..

Of course, back when I did that testing and had rotational media, we
didn't have the per-bdi writeback logic with the smart speed-dependent
depths etc, so it may be that we're just so much better at writeback
these days that it's not nearly as noticeable any more.

                        Linus

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2012-06-06  3:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20120528114124.GA6813@localhost>
     [not found] ` <CA+55aFxHt8q8+jQDuoaK=hObX+73iSBTa4bBWodCX3s-y4Q1GQ@mail.gmail.com>
2012-05-29 15:57   ` Fengguang Wu
2012-05-29 17:35     ` Linus Torvalds
2012-05-30  3:21       ` Fengguang Wu
2012-06-05  1:01         ` Dave Chinner
2012-06-05 17:18           ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-05 17:23         ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-05 17:41           ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-05 18:48             ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-05 20:10               ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-06  2:57                 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-06  3:14                   ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2012-06-06 12:14                     ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-06 14:00                       ` Fengguang Wu
2012-06-06 17:04                         ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-07  9:45                           ` Jan Kara
2012-06-07 19:06                             ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-06 16:15                       ` Vivek Goyal
2012-06-06 14:08                   ` Fengguang Wu

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=CA+55aFyxucvhYhbk0yyNa1WSeYXgHHAyWRHPNWDwODQhyAWGww@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.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