[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch][rfc] ddds: "dynamic dynamic data structure" algorithm, for adaptive dcache hash table sizing (resend)
    On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 09:02:25AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
    > (resending with correct netdev address)
    > Hi,
    > I thought I should quickly bring this patch up to date and write it up
    > properly, because IMO it is still useful. I earlier had tried to turn the
    > algorithm into a library that could be plugged into with specific lookup
    > functions and such, but that got really nasty and also difficult to retain
    > a really light fastpath. I don't think it is too nasty to open-code it...
    > Describe the "Dynamic dynamic data structure" (DDDS) algorithm, and implement
    > adaptive dcache hash table sizing using DDDS.
    > The dcache hash size is increased to the next power of 2 if the number
    > of dentries exceeds the current size of the dcache hash table. It is decreased
    > in size if it is currently more than 3 times the number of dentries.
    > This might be a dumb thing to do. It also currently performs the hash resizing
    > check for each dentry insertion/deletion, and calls the resizing in-line from
    > there: that's bad, because resizing takes several RCU grace periods. Rather it
    > should kick off a thread to do the resizing, or even have a background worker
    > thread checking the sizes periodically and resizing if required.
    > With this algorithm, I can fit a whole kernel source and git tree in my dcache
    > hash table that is still 1/8th the size it would be before the patch.
    > I'm cc'ing netdev because Dave did express some interest in using this for
    > some networking hashes, and network guys in general are pretty cluey when it
    > comes to hashes and such ;)

    Without even looking at the code I'd say geeting the dcache lookup data
    structure as a hash is the main problem here. Dcache lookup is
    fundamentally a tree lookup, with some very nice domain splits
    (superblocks or directories). Mapping these back to a global hash is
    a rather bad idea, not just for scalability purposes.

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-10-07 09:21    [W:0.028 / U:3.200 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site