From: Peter Staubach Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] flow control for WRITE requests Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 15:18:40 -0400 Message-ID: <4A1D9210.8070102@redhat.com> References: <49C93526.70303@redhat.com> <20090324211917.GJ19389@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------030708070308060307070705" Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" , NFS list To: Trond Myklebust Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:43477 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756073AbZE0TSo (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2009 15:18:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090324211917.GJ19389@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030708070308060307070705 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 03:31:50PM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote: > >> Hi. >> >> Attached is a patch which implements some flow control for the >> NFS client to control dirty pages. The flow control is >> implemented on a per-file basis and causes dirty pages to be >> written out when the client can detect that the application is >> writing in a serial fashion and has dirtied enough pages to >> fill a complete over the wire transfer. >> >> This work was precipitated by working on a situation where a >> server at a customer site was not able to adequately handle >> the behavior of the Linux NFS client. This particular server >> required that all data to the file written to the file be >> written in a strictly serial fashion. It also had problems >> handling the Linux NFS client semantic of caching a large >> amount of data and then sending out that data all at once. >> >> The sequential ordering problem was resolved by a previous >> patch which was submitted to the linux-nfs list. This patch >> addresses the capacity problem. >> >> The problem is resolved by sending WRITE requests much >> earlier in the process of the application writing to the file. >> The client keeps track of the number of dirty pages associated >> with the file and also the last offset of the data being >> written. When the client detects that a full over the wire >> transfer could be constructed and that the application is >> writing sequentially, then it generates an UNSTABLE write to >> server for the currently dirty data. >> >> The client also keeps track of the number of these WRITE >> requests which have been generated. It flow controls based >> on a configurable maximum. This keeps the client from >> completely overwhelming the server. >> >> A nice side effect of the framework is that the issue of >> stat()'ing a file being written can be handled much more >> quickly than before. The amount of data that must be >> transmitted to the server to satisfy the "latest mtime" >> requirement is limited. Also, the application writing to >> the file is blocked until the over the wire GETATTR is >> completed. This allows the GETATTR to be send and the >> response received without competing with the data being >> written. >> >> No performance regressions were seen during informal >> performance testing. >> >> As a side note -- the more natural model of flow control >> would seem to be at the client/server level instead of >> the per-file level. However, that level was too coarse >> with the particular server that was required to be used >> because its requirements were at the per-file level. >> > > I don't understand what you mean by "its requirements were at the > per-file level". > > >> The new functionality in this patch is controlled via the >> use of the sysctl, nfs_max_outstanding_writes. It defaults >> to 0, meaning no flow control and the current behaviors. >> Setting it to any non-zero value enables the functionality. >> The value of 16 seems to be a good number and aligns with >> other NFS and RPC tunables. >> >> Lastly, the functionality of starting WRITE requests sooner >> to smooth out the i/o pattern should probably be done by the >> VM subsystem. I am looking into this, but in the meantime >> and to solve the immediate problem, this support is proposed. >> > > It seems unfortunate if we add a sysctl to work around a problem that > ends up being fixed some other way a version or two later. > > Would be great to have some progress on these problems, though.... > > --b. > Hi. I have attached a new testcase which exhibits this particular situation. One script writes out 6 ~1GB files in parallel, while the other script is simultaneously running an "ls -l" in the directory. When run on a system large enough to store all ~6GB of data, the dd processes basically write(2) all of their data into memory very quickly and then spend most of their time in the close(2) system call flushing the page cache due to the close to open processing. The current flow control support in the NFS client does not work well for this situation. It was designed to catch the process filling memory and to block it while the page cache flush is being done by the process doing the stat(2). The problem with this approach is that there could potentially be gigabytes of page cache which needs to be flushed to the server during the stat(2) processing. This blocks the application doing the stat(2) for potentially a very long time, based on the amount of data which was cached, the speed of the network, and the speed of the server. The solution is to limit the amount of data that must be flushed during the stat(2) call. This can be done by starting i/o when the application has filled enough pages to fill an entire wsize'd transfer and by limiting the number of these transfers which are outstanding so as not to overwhelm the server. ----------- While it seems that it would be good to have this done by the VM itself, the current architecture of the VM does not seem to yield itself easily to doing this. It seems like doing something like a per-file bdi would do the trick, however the system is not scalable to the number of bdi's that that would require. I am open to suggestions for alternate solutions, but in the meantime, this support does seem to address the situation. In my test environment, it also increases, significantly, performance when sequentially writing large files. My throughput when dd'ing /dev/sda1 to an NFS mounted file went from ~22MB/s to ~38MB/s. (I do this for image backups for my laptop.) Your mileage may vary however. :-) So, we can consider taking this so that we can address some customer needs? Thanx... ps --------------030708070308060307070705 Content-Type: application/x-shellscript; name="master.sh" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="master.sh" IyEvYmluL3NoCgojd2hpbGUgOgojZG8KCWZvciBpIGluIGBzZXEgMSA2YAoJZG8KCQlkZCBp Zj0vZGV2L3plcm8gb2Y9dGVzdGZpbGUke2l9IGJzPTEwMjRrIGNvdW50PTEwMDAgJgoJZG9u ZQoKCXdhaXQKIwlzbGVlcCAyCiNkb25lCg== --------------030708070308060307070705 Content-Type: application/x-shellscript; name="reader.sh" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="reader.sh" IyEvYmluL3NoCgp3aGlsZSA6CmRvCgkvdXNyL2Jpbi90aW1lIC1wIGxzIC1sIDI+JjEgfCBl Z3JlcCAndGVzdGZpbGV8cmVhbCcKCXNsZWVwIDIKZG9uZQo= --------------030708070308060307070705--