Re: [PATCH -next RFC v3 0/8] improve tag allocation under heavy load

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

 



在 2022/04/25 19:20, Damien Le Moal 写道:
On 4/25/22 16:28, yukuai (C) wrote:
在 2022/04/25 15:06, Damien Le Moal 写道:

By the way, did you check that doing something like:

echo 2048 > /sys/block/sdX/queue/nr_requests

improves performance for your high number of jobs test case ?

Yes, performance will not degrade when numjobs is not greater than 256
in this case.

That is my thinking as well. I am asking if did check that (did you run it ?).

Hi,

I'm sure I ran it with 256 jobs before.

However, I didn't run it with 512 jobs. And following is the result I
just tested:

What was nr_requests ? The default 64 ?
If you increase that number, do you see better throughput/more requests
being sequential ?

Sorry if I didn't explain this clearly.

If nr_requests is 64, numjobs is 512, the ratio of sequential is about
20%. If nr_requests is 2048, numjobs is 512, the ratio is 49.1%.

Then yes, increase nr_requests can improve performance in the test case.




ratio of sequential io: 49.1%

Read|Write seek

cnt 99338, zero cnt 48753

      >=(KB) .. <(KB)     : count       ratio |distribution
               |
           0 .. 1         : 48753       49.1%
|########################################|
           1 .. 2         : 0            0.0% |
               |
           2 .. 4         : 0            0.0% |
               |
           4 .. 8         : 0            0.0% |
               |
           8 .. 16        : 0            0.0% |
               |
          16 .. 32        : 0            0.0% |
               |
          32 .. 64        : 0            0.0% |
               |
          64 .. 128       : 4975         5.0% |#####
               |
         128 .. 256       : 4439         4.5% |####
               |
         256 .. 512       : 2615         2.6% |###
               |
         512 .. 1024      : 967          1.0% |#
               |
        1024 .. 2048      : 213          0.2% |#
               |
        2048 .. 4096      : 375          0.4% |#
               |
        4096 .. 8192      : 723          0.7% |#
               |
        8192 .. 16384     : 1436         1.4% |##
               |
       16384 .. 32768     : 2626         2.6% |###
               |
       32768 .. 65536     : 4197         4.2% |####
               |
       65536 .. 131072    : 6431         6.5% |######
               |
      131072 .. 262144    : 7590         7.6% |#######
               |
      262144 .. 524288    : 6433         6.5% |######
               |
      524288 .. 1048576   : 4583         4.6% |####
               |
     1048576 .. 2097152   : 2237         2.3% |##
               |
     2097152 .. 4194304   : 489          0.5% |#
               |
     4194304 .. 8388608   : 83           0.1% |#
               |
     8388608 .. 16777216  : 36           0.0% |#
               |
    16777216 .. 33554432  : 0            0.0% |
               |
    33554432 .. 67108864  : 0            0.0% |
               |
    67108864 .. 134217728 : 137          0.1% |#
               |





[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux