[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [dm-devel] dm-cache policy mq: promotion very picky?



On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:44:53PM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:23:04PM +0200, Pierre Beck wrote:
> > Maybe I'm misunderstanding how the heuristics work - what makes mq
> > pick a block for promotion?
> 
> Hi Pierre,
> 
> The mq policy is indeed very picky.  The first thing I'd suggest is
> you pick up my latest patches if you haven't already:
> 
> http://device-mapper.org/patches/3.10/

Hm, it looks like all but two of the dmcache patches are in.  The two patches
to mq aren't (yet) there.

> You just need the dm-cache*.patch ones, apply in the order given in
> the series file.
> 
> At it's heart mq is v. simple.  It divides time up into slices called
> 'ticks'.  Hit counts are maintained for all blocks in the cache, and a
> group of blocks that we're thinking of promoting.  A cache/origin
> block can only be hit once in each tick.  When a candidate block's hit
> count goes over a threshold it gets promoted.
> 
> The threshold depends on the hit counts of the entries in the cache.
> 
> At the moment hit counts don't degrade with time, that's something I
> need to add to allow the cache to be more responsive to changing work
> loads.
> 
> 
> If you start with a discarded device (eg, you've run mkfs).  Then the
> cache should fill up v. quickly with my latest patches.  Perhaps it
> would be worth verifying this before you start investigating the
> effects of sequential io?

I'm also curious about what happens if, say, you have a discard-enabled
zerofree that can "discard" just the unallocated blocks.  That probably only
helps if you can discard pieces big enough to fit one of dmcache's discard
regions, right?

--D
> 
> - Joe
> 
> --
> dm-devel mailing list
> dm-devel redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]