On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 08:23:14PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 17:11:20 +0800
> Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Andrew and Ken,
> >
> > Here are some more experiments on the writeback stuff.
> > Comments are highly welcome~
>
> I've been doing benchmarks lately to try and trigger fragmentation, and
> one of them is a simulation of make -j N. It takes a list of all
> the .o files in the kernel tree, randomly sorts them and then
> creates bogus files with the same names and sizes in clean kernel trees.
>
> This is basically creating a whole bunch of files in random order in a
> whole bunch of subdirectories.
>
> The results aren't pretty:
>
> http://oss.oracle.com/~mason/compilebench/makej/compare-compile-dirs-0.png
>
> The top graph shows one dot for each write over time. It shows that
> ext3 is basically writing all over the place the whole time. But, ext3
> actually wins the read phase, so the layout isn't horrible. My guess
> is that if we introduce some write clustering by sending a group of
> inodes down at the same time, it'll go much much better.
>
> Andrew has mentioned bringing a few radix trees into the writeback paths
> before, it seems like file servers and other general uses will benefit
> from better clustering here.
>
> I'm hoping to talk you into trying it out ;)
Thank you for the description of problem. So far I have a similar one
in mind: if we are to delay writeback of atime-dirty-only inodes to
above 1 hour, some grouping/piggy-backing scenario would be
beneficial. (Which I guess does not deserve the complexity now that
we have Ingo's make-reltime-default patch.)
My vague idea is to
- keep the s_io/s_more_io as a FIFO/cyclic writeback dispatching queue.
- convert s_dirty to some radix-tree/rbtree based data structure.
It would have dual functions: delayed-writeback and clustered-writeback.
clustered-writeback:
- Use inode number as clue of locality, hence the key for the sorted
tree.
- Drain some more s_dirty inodes into s_io on every kupdate wakeup,
but do it in the ascending order of inode number instead of
->dirtied_when.
delayed-writeback:
- Make sure that a full scan of the s_dirty tree takes <=30s, i.e.
dirty_expire_interval.
Notes:
(1) I'm not sure inode number is correlated to disk location in
filesystems other than ext2/3/4. Or parent dir?
(2) It duplicates some function of elevators. Why is it necessary?
Maybe we have no clue on the exact data location at this time?
Fengguang
-
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]
