[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140421231002.GC15995@dastard>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 09:10:02 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] ext4: extents status tree shrinker improvement
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:35:26AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> So I've been thinking about this some more, and it seems to me is
> actually, what we need is *both* an LRU and a RR scheme.
We already have shrinker implementations that do this. It would
probably take 10-15 lines of code to add it to any existing LRU
list based shrinker.....
> The real problem here is that we have workloads that are generating a
> large number of "low value" extent cache entries. That is, they are
> extremely unlikely to be used again, because they are small, and being
> generated when you have a highly fragmented extent status cache, and
> very often, the workload is a random read/write workload, so there is
> no way the full "working set" of extent cache entries could be kept in
> memory at the same time anyway. These less valuable cache entries are
> being generated at a very high rate, and we want to make sure we don't
> penalize the "valuable" cache entries.
Yup, an "object referenced" bit that gets set on a cache lookup hit.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists