Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765350AbXHXNzZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:55:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752956AbXHXNzK (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:55:10 -0400 Received: from smtp.ustc.edu.cn ([202.38.64.16]:35696 "HELO ustc.edu.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757654AbXHXNzI (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:55:08 -0400 Message-ID: <387963704.05674@ustc.edu.cn> X-EYOUMAIL-SMTPAUTH: wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:55:04 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu To: David Chinner Cc: Chris Mason , Andrew Morton , Ken Chen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] writeback time order/delay fixes take 3 Message-ID: <20070824135504.GA9029@mail.ustc.edu.cn> References: <386910467.21100@ustc.edu.cn> <20070821202314.335e86ec@think.oraclecorp.com> <20070822011841.GA8090@mail.ustc.edu.cn> <20070823023306.GM61154114@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070823023306.GM61154114@sgi.com> X-GPG-Fingerprint: 53D2 DDCE AB5C 8DC6 188B 1CB1 F766 DA34 8D8B 1C6D User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1322 Lines: 31 On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 12:33:06PM +1000, David Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 09:18:41AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 08:23:14PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > > Notes: > > (1) I'm not sure inode number is correlated to disk location in > > filesystems other than ext2/3/4. Or parent dir? > > The correspond to the exact location on disk on XFS. But, XFS has it's > own inode clustering (see xfs_iflush) and it can't be moved up > into the generic layers because of locking and integration into > the transaction subsystem. > > > (2) It duplicates some function of elevators. Why is it necessary? > > The elevators have no clue as to how the filesystem might treat adjacent > inodes. In XFS, inode clustering is a fundamental feature of the inode > reading and writing and that is something no elevator can hope to > acheive.... Thank you. That explains the linear write curve(perfect!) in Chris' graph. I wonder if XFS can benefit any more from the general writeback clustering. How large would be a typical XFS cluster? -fengguang - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/