Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757506AbZCaMbs (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 08:31:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754479AbZCaMbg (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 08:31:36 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:64915 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753482AbZCaMbf (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 08:31:35 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,452,1233561600"; d="scan'208";a="126081549" Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:31:12 +0800 From: Wu Fengguang To: Jos Houtman Cc: Nick Piggin , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jeff Layton , Dave Chinner , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "jens.axboe@oracle.com" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "hch@infradead.org" , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Page Cache writeback too slow, SSD/noop scheduler/ext2 Message-ID: <20090331123112.GA15098@localhost> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1346 Lines: 34 On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:16:52PM +0800, Jos Houtman wrote: > > > > Next to that I was wondering if there are any plans to make sure that not > > all dirty-files are written back in the same interval. > > > > In my case all database files are written back each 30 seconds, while I > > would prefer them to be more divided over the interval. > > There another question I have: does the writeback go through the io > scheduler? Because no matter the io scheduler or the tuning done, the > writeback algorithm totally starves the reads. I noticed this annoying writes-starve-reads problem too. I'll look into it. > See the url below for an example with CFQ, but deadline or noop all show > this behaviour: > http://94.100.113.33/535450001-535500000/535451701-535451800/535451800_6_L7g > t.jpeg > > Is there anything I can do about this behaviour by creating a better > interleaving of the reads and writes? I guess it should be handled in the generic block io layer. Once we solved the writes-starve-reads problem, the bursty-writeback behavior becomes a no-problem for SSD. Thanks, 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/