Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:45:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:44:50 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:30478 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:44:42 -0500 Message-ID: <3C7FE7DD.98121E87@zip.com.au> Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 12:43:09 -0800 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18-rc2 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jeff V. Merkey" CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: queue_nr_requests needs to be selective In-Reply-To: <20020301132254.A11528@vger.timpanogas.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote: > > Linus/Alan/Linux, > > Performance numbers can be increased dramatically (> 300 MB/S) > by increasing queue_nr_requests in ll_rw_blk.c on large RAID > controllers that are hosting a lot of drives. I don't immediately see why increasing the queue length should increase bandwidth in this manner. One possibility is that the shorter queue results in tasks sleeping in __get_request_wait more often, and the real problem is the "request starvation" thing. The "request starvation" thing could conceivably result in more seeky behaviour. In your kernel, disk writeouts come from two places: - Off the tail of the dirty buffer LRU - Basically random guess, from the page LRU. It's competition between these two writeout sources which causes decreased bandwidth - I've seen kernels in which ext2 writeback performance was down 40% due to this. Anyway. You definitely need to try 2.4.19-pre1. Max sleep times in __get_request_wait will be improved, and it's possible that the bandwidth will improve. Or not. My gut feel is that it won't help. And yes, 128 requests is too few. It used to be ~1000. I think this change was made in a (misguided, unsuccessful) attempt to manage latency for readers. The request queue is the only mechanism we have for realigning out-of-order requests and it needs to be larger so it can do this better. I've seen 15-25% throughput improvements from a 1024-slot request queue. And if a return to a large request queue damages latency (it doesn't) then we need to fix that latency *without* damaging request merging. First step: please test 2.4.19-pre1 or -pre2. Also 2.4.19-pre1-ac2 may provide some surprises.. - - 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/