lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RESEND][RFC] BFQ I/O Scheduler
> On Thu, Apr 17 2008, Paolo Valente wrote:
> > Pavel Machek ha scritto:
> > >
> > >>In the first type of tests, to achieve a higher throughput than CFQ
> > >>(with the default 100 ms time slice), the maximum budget for BFQ
> > >>had to be set to at least 4k sectors. Using the same value for the
> > >>
> > >
> > >Hmm, 4k sectors is ~40 seconds worst case, no? That's quite long...
> > >
> > Actually, in the worst case among our tests, the aggregate throughput
> > with 4k sectors was ~ 20 MB/s, hence the time for 4k sectors ~ 4k * 512
> > / 20M = 100 ms.
>
> That's not worse case, it is pretty close to BEST case. Worst case is 4k
> of sectors, with each being a 512b IO and causing a full stroke seek.
> For that type of workload, even a modern sata hard drive will be doing
> 500kb/sec or less. That's rougly a thousand sectors per seconds, so ~4
> seconds worst case for 4k sectors.

One seek is still 10msec on modern drive, right? So 4k seeks =
40seconds, no? 4seconds would correspond to 1msec per seek, which
seems low.

writes with O_SYNC could force full seek on each request, right?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-17 10:51    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site