Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754582AbZIPOtu (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:49:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753145AbZIPOts (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:49:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:2828 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752255AbZIPOts (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:49:48 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:49:46 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal To: Tobias Oetiker Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: io-controller: file system meta data operations Message-ID: <20090916144946.GB5221@redhat.com> 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: 2016 Lines: 52 On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 02:58:52PM +0200, Tobias Oetiker wrote: > Hi Vivek, > > I am trying to optimize user-experience on a busy NFS server. > > I think much could be achieved if the following was true. > > get a response to file system meta data operations (opendir, > readdir, stat, mkdir, unlink) within 200 ms even under heavy > read/write strain ... > > In the course of my research I also tried the io-controller patches. > > My test setup consists of several tar processes keeping a disk busy > by packing and unpacking Linux kernels. > > I was able to bring read and write bandwidth into balance by > putting the reading and writing tars in to different cgroups. > > Unfortunately this did not seem to help my goal since meta data > operations do not seem to get treated differently from normal > operations (or maybe even worse?) > > Is there a way to get io-controller to help me with this? Hi tobi, Is it better with vanilla CFQ (without io controller). I see that CFQ preempts the ongoing process if it receives a meta data request and that way it provides faster response. If yes, then similar thing should work for IO controller also. Wait there is one issue though. If a file system request gets backlogged in a group while a different group was being served, then preemption will not happen and that's probably the reason you are not seeing better latencies. I think there are two ways to handle this in IO controller. - Put the meta data requesting processes at the front of the service tree in respective group. This will make sure that even if there are other sequential readers or heavy writers in the group, this request gets served quickly. I will write a small patch for this. I think that should help you. Thanks Vivek -- 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/