----- Original Message ---- > From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Steve Rago <sar@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx" <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>; jens.axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tue, December 22, 2009 2:59:07 AM > Subject: Re: [PATCH] improve the performance of large sequential write NFS workloads > [big snip] > > In general it's reasonable to keep NFS per-file nr_dirty low, however > questionable to do per-file nr_writeback throttling. This does not > work well with the global limits - eg. when there are many dirty > files, the summed-up nr_writeback will still grow out of control. > And it's more likely to impact user visible responsiveness than > a global limit. But my opinion can be biased -- me have a patch to > do global NFS nr_writeback limit ;) > is that "NFS: introduce writeback wait queue", which you sent me a while ago and I did not test until now :-( ? Cheers Martin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
