Balbir Singh wrote: > Dave Hansen wrote: >> On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 17:51 +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote: >>> This series of patches of dm-ioband now includes "The bio tracking mechanism," >>> which has been posted individually to this mailing list. >>> This makes it easy for anybody to control the I/O bandwidth even when >>> the I/O is one of delayed-write requests. >> During the Containers mini-summit at OLS, it was mentioned that there >> are at least *FOUR* of these I/O controllers floating around. Have you >> talked to the other authors? (I've cc'd at least one of them). >> >> We obviously can't come to any kind of real consensus with people just >> tossing the same patches back and forth. > > Ryo and Andrea - Naveen and Satoshi met up at OLS and discussed their approach. > It would be really nice to see an RFC, I know Andrea did work on this and > compared the approaches. > yes, I wrote down something about the comparison of priority-based vs bandwidth shaping solutions in terms of performance predictability. And other considerations, like the one I cited before, about dirty-ratio throttling in memory, AIO handling, etc. Something is also reported in the io-throttle documentation: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121780176907686&w=2 But ok, I agree with Balbir, I can try to put the things together (in a better form in particular) and try to post an RFC together with Ryo. Ryo, do you have other documentation besides the info reported in the dm-ioband website? Thanks, -Andrea _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
