lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: CFQ read performance regression
From
Date
On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 17:53 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 22-04-10 12:23:29, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > I have very little understanding of I/O scheduling but my idea of what's
> > really needed here is to realize that one queue is not able to saturate
> > the device and there's a large backlog of requests on other queues that
> > are waiting to be served. Is something like that implementable?
> I see a problem with defining "saturate the device" - but maybe we could
> measure something like "completed requests / sec" and try autotuning
> slice_idle to maximize this value (hopefully the utility function should
> be concave so we can just use "local optimization").

Yeah, detecting saturation may be difficult.

I guess that function depends on a lot of other things as well,
including seek times, etc. Not easy to optimize.

I'm still wondering what makes such a difference between CFQ on 2.6.16
and CFQ on 2.6.27-34, why is the one in older kernels performing so much
better in this situation?

What should we tell our customers? The default settings should at least
handle these systems a bit better.

Thanks,
Miklos



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-23 12:51    [W:0.108 / U:0.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site