Re: cfq misbehaving on 2.6.11-1.14_FC3

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

 



--- Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> THe problem here is that cfq  (and the other io schedulers) still
> consider the io async even if fsync() ends up waiting for it to
> complete. So there's no real QOS being applied to these pending writes,
> and I don't immediately see how we can improve that situation right now.
<I might sound stupid>
I still don't understand why async requests are in a different queue than the
sync ones?
Wouldn't it be simpler to consider all the IO the same, and like you pointed
out, consider synced IO to be equivalent to async + some sync (as in wait for
completion) call (fsync goes a little too far).
</I might sound stupid>

> 
> What file system are you using? I ran your test on ext2, and it didn't
> give me more than ~2 seconds latency for the fsync. Tried reiserfs now,
> and it's in the 23-24 range.
> 
I am using ext3 on Fedora Core 3.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux