Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932480Ab0DQDHM (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2010 23:07:12 -0400 Received: from bld-mail14.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.99]:45426 "EHLO mail.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758615Ab0DQDHK (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2010 23:07:10 -0400 Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 13:06:48 +1000 From: Dave Chinner To: Alan Cox Cc: Suleiman Souhlal , KOSAKI Motohiro , Mel Gorman , Chris Mason , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, suleiman@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] vmscan: delegate pageout io to flusher thread if current is kswapd Message-ID: <20100417030648.GH2493@dastard> References: <20100415013436.GO2493@dastard> <20100415130212.D16E.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100415131106.D174.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <64BE60A8-EEF9-4AC6-AF0A-0ED3CB544726@freebsd.org> <20100415093214.GV2493@dastard> <85DB7083-8E78-4884-9E76-5BD803C530EF@freebsd.org> <20100415233339.GW2493@dastard> <20100416105002.191adeb1@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100416105002.191adeb1@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2001 Lines: 44 On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:50:02AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > No. If you are doing full disk seeks between random chunks, then you > > still lose a large amount of throughput. e.g. if the seek time is > > 10ms and your IO time is 10ms for each 4k page, then increasing the > > size ito 64k makes it 10ms seek and 12ms for the IO. We might increase > > throughput but we are still limited to 100 IOs per second. We've > > gone from 400kB/s to 6MB/s, but that's still an order of magnitude > > short of the 100MB/s full size IOs with little in way of seeks > > between them will acheive on the same spindle... > > The usual armwaving numbers for ops/sec for an ATA disk are in the 200 > ops/sec range so that seems horribly credible. Yeah, in my experience 7200rpm SATA will get you 200 ops/s when you are doing really small seeks as the typical minimum seek time is around 4-5ms. Average seek time, however, is usually in the range of 10ms, because full head sweep + spindle rotation seeks take in the order of 15ms. Hence small random IO tends to result in seek times nearer the average seek time than the minimum, so that's what i tend to use for determining the number of ops/s a disk will sustain. > But then I've never quite understood why our anonymous paging isn't > sorting stuff as best it can and then using the drive as a log structure > with in memory metadata so it can stream the pages onto disk. Read > performance is goig to be similar (maybe better if you have a log tidy > when idle), write ought to be far better. Sounds like a worthy project for someone to sink their teeth into. Lots of people would like to have a system that can page out at hundreds of megabytes a second.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com -- 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/