Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752985AbZIYPGz (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:06:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752776AbZIYPGy (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:06:54 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:14080 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752716AbZIYPGy (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:06:54 -0400 Message-ID: <4ABCDBFF.1020203@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:04:31 -0400 From: Rik van Riel Organization: Red Hat, Inc User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080915) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ryo Tsuruta CC: vgoyal@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, righi.andrea@gmail.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, agk@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, jmarchan@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: IO scheduler based IO controller V10 References: <1253820332-10246-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> <20090924143315.781cd0ac.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090925050429.GB12555@redhat.com> <20090925.180724.104041942.ryov@valinux.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <20090925.180724.104041942.ryov@valinux.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 838 Lines: 23 Ryo Tsuruta wrote: > Because dm-ioband provides faireness in terms of how many IO requests > are issued or how many bytes are transferred, so this behaviour is to > be expected. Do you think fairness in terms of IO requests and size is > not fair? When there are two workloads competing for the same resources, I would expect each of the workloads to run at about 50% of the speed at which it would run on an uncontended system. Having one of the workloads run at 95% of the uncontended speed and the other workload at 5% is "not fair" (to put it diplomatically). -- All rights reversed. -- 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/