Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755080Ab0FHS4P (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 8 Jun 2010 14:56:15 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22652 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753477Ab0FHS4O (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 8 Jun 2010 14:56:14 -0400
Subject: Re: RFC: dirty_ratio back to 40%
From: Larry Woodman <lwoodman@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100608184913.GA12154@infradead.org>
References: <4BF51B0A.1050901@redhat.com>
	 <20100608184913.GA12154@infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:01:24 -0400
Message-Id: <1276023684.8736.51.camel@dhcp-100-19-198.bos.redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2386
Lines: 62

On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 14:49 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Did this patch get merged somewhere?

I dont think it ever did, about 1/2 of responses were for it and the
other 1/2 against it.

Larry

> 
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 07:20:42AM -0400, Larry Woodman wrote:
> > We've seen multiple performance regressions linked to the lower(20%)
> > dirty_ratio.  When performing enough IO to overwhelm the background
> > flush daemons the percent of dirty pagecache memory quickly climbs
> > to the new/lower dirty_ratio value of 20%.  At that point all
> > writing processes are forced to stop and write dirty pagecache pages
> > back to disk.  This causes performance regressions in several
> > benchmarks as well as causing
> > a noticeable overall sluggishness.  We all know that the dirty_ratio is
> > an integrity vs performance trade-off but the file system journaling
> > will cover any devastating effects in the event of a system crash.
> > 
> > Increasing the dirty_ratio to 40% will regain the performance loss seen
> > in several benchmarks.  Whats everyone think about this???
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> > index ef27e73..645a462 100644
> > --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> > +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int vm_highmem_is_dirtyable;
> > /*
> >  * The generator of dirty data starts writeback at this percentage
> >  */
> > -int vm_dirty_ratio = 20;
> > +int vm_dirty_ratio = 40;
> > 
> > /*
> >  * vm_dirty_bytes starts at 0 (disabled) so that it is a function of
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> > the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
> ---end quoted text---
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

--
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/