Return-Path: Received: from bld-mail15.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.100]:45119 "EHLO mail.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753541Ab0BXD3j (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Feb 2010 22:29:39 -0500 Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 14:29:34 +1100 From: Dave Chinner To: Wu Fengguang Cc: Trond Myklebust , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Memory Management List , LKML Subject: Re: [RFC] nfs: use 2*rsize readahead size Message-ID: <20100224032934.GF16175@discord.disaster> References: <20100224024100.GA17048@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20100224024100.GA17048@localhost> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:41:01AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > With default rsize=512k and NFS_MAX_READAHEAD=15, the current NFS > readahead size 512k*15=7680k is too large than necessary for typical > clients. > > On a e1000e--e1000e connection, I got the following numbers > > readahead size throughput > 16k 35.5 MB/s > 32k 54.3 MB/s > 64k 64.1 MB/s > 128k 70.5 MB/s > 256k 74.6 MB/s > rsize ==> 512k 77.4 MB/s > 1024k 85.5 MB/s > 2048k 86.8 MB/s > 4096k 87.9 MB/s > 8192k 89.0 MB/s > 16384k 87.7 MB/s > > So it seems that readahead_size=2*rsize (ie. keep two RPC requests in flight) > can already get near full NFS bandwidth. > > The test script is: > > #!/bin/sh > > file=/mnt/sparse > BDI=0:15 > > for rasize in 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 8192 16384 > do > echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches > echo $rasize > /sys/devices/virtual/bdi/$BDI/read_ahead_kb > echo readahead_size=${rasize}k > dd if=$file of=/dev/null bs=4k count=1024000 > done That's doing a cached read out of the server cache, right? You might find the results are different if the server has to read the file from disk. I would expect reads from the server cache not to require much readahead as there is no IO latency on the server side for the readahead to hide.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com