Re: New dm-bufio with shrinker API

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

 



On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 11:07:15AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 03:49:14PM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
> > I changed the test suite to reset the peak_allocated parameter before
> > each test and record it at the end of each test.  It's very hard to
> > say what is right and wrong when talking about cache sizes, since you
> > always have to qualify anything by saying 'for this particular load'.
> > However, I think bufio could be more aggressive about recycling cache
> > entries.  With the old block manager the test suite ran nicely with
> > less than 256k, from memory I think I started seeing slow down around
> > 128k.  With bufio I'm seeing consistently larger cache sizes for the
> > same performance.
> 
> IS there any reason you'll need a fixed size?  This is fairly similar in
> concept to the XFS buffercache, which does perfectly well by allocation
> memory as needed, and letting the shrinker reclaim buffers when under
> memory pressure.

Well if the shrinker does such a good job, do we really need to set a
maximum value for the cache size at all? (perhaps this was your
question and I'm being slow).

- Joe

--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel


[Index of Archives]     [DM Crypt]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux