Re: ext4 vs btrfs performance on SSD array

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

 



On Tue 02-09-14 07:31:04, Ted Tso wrote:
> >  - the very small max readahead size
> 
> For things like the readahead size, that's probably something that we
> should autotune, based the time it takes to read N sectors.  i.e.,
> start N relatively small, such as 128k, and then bump it up based on
> how long it takes to do a sequential read of N sectors until it hits a
> given tunable, which is specified in milliseconds instead of kilobytes.
  Actually the amount of readahead we do is autotuned (based on hit rate).
So I would keep the setting in sysfs as the maximum size adaptive readahead
can ever read and we can bump it up. We can possibly add another feedback
into the readahead code to tune actualy readahead size depending on device
speed but we'd have to research exactly what algorithm would work best.

								Honza

-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux