[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] a few storage topics
- From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer redhat com>
- To: Chris Mason <chris mason oracle com>
- Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger dilger ca>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange redhat com>, Jan Kara <jack suse cz>, "linux-scsi vger kernel org" <linux-scsi vger kernel org>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer redhat com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch infradead org>, "dm-devel redhat com" <dm-devel redhat com>, fengguang wu gmail com, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh panasas com>, "linux-fsdevel vger kernel org" <linux-fsdevel vger kernel org>, "lsf-pc lists linux-foundation org" <lsf-pc lists linux-foundation org>
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] a few storage topics
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:14:14 -0500
Chris Mason <chris mason oracle com> writes:
>> All three filesystems use the generic mpages code for reads, so they
>> all get the same (bad) I/O patterns. Looks like we need to fix this up
>> ASAP.
>
> Can you easily run btrfs through the same rig? We don't use mpages and
> I'm curious.
The readahead code was to blame, here. I wonder if we can change the
logic there to not break larger I/Os down into smaller sized ones.
Fengguang, doing a dd if=file of=/dev/null bs=1M results in 128K I/Os,
when 128KB is the read_ahead_kb value. Is there any heuristic you could
apply to not break larger I/Os up like this? Does that make sense?
Cheers,
Jeff
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]