[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29d50d24-f8e7-5ef4-d4d8-3ea6fb1c6ed3@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 19:17:19 +0800
From: Joseph Qi <jiangqi903@...il.com>
To: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Xiaoguang Wang <xiaoguang.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Liu Bo <bo.liu@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] performance regression with "ext4: Allow parallel DIO
reads"
Hi Ted & Jan,
Could you please give your valuable comments?
Thanks,
Joseph
On 19/7/19 17:22, Joseph Qi wrote:
> Hi Ted & Jan,
> I've observed an significant performance regression with the following
> commit in my Intel P3600 NVMe SSD.
> 16c54688592c ext4: Allow parallel DIO reads
>
> From my initial investigation, it may be because of the
> inode_lock_shared (down_read) consumes more than inode_lock (down_write)
> in mixed random read write workload.
>
> Here is my test result.
>
> ioengine=psync
> direct=1
> rw=randrw
> iodepth=1
> numjobs=8
> size=20G
> runtime=600
>
> w/ parallel dio reads : kernel 5.2.0
> w/o parallel dio reads: kernel 5.2.0, then revert the following commits:
> 1d39834fba99 ext4: remove EXT4_STATE_DIOREAD_LOCK flag (related)
> e5465795cac4 ext4: fix off-by-one error when writing back pages before dio read (related)
> 16c54688592c ext4: Allow parallel DIO reads
>
> bs=4k:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/ parallel dio reads | READ 30898KB/s, 7724, 555.00us | WRITE 30875KB/s, 7718, 479.70us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/o parallel dio reads| READ 117915KB/s, 29478, 248.18us | WRITE 117854KB/s,29463, 21.91us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> bs=16k:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/ parallel dio reads | READ 58961KB/s, 3685, 835.28us | WRITE 58877KB/s, 3679, 1335.98us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/o parallel dio reads| READ 218409KB/s, 13650, 554.46us | WRITE 218257KB/s,13641, 29.22us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> bs=64k:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/ parallel dio reads | READ 119396KB/s, 1865, 1759.38us | WRITE 119159KB/s, 1861, 2532.26us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/o parallel dio reads| READ 422815KB/s, 6606, 1146.05us | WRITE 421619KB/s, 6587, 60.72us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> bs=512k:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/ parallel dio reads | READ 392973KB/s, 767, 5046.35us | WRITE 393165KB/s, 767, 5359.86us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/o parallel dio reads| READ 590266KB/s, 1152, 4312.01us | WRITE 590554KB/s, 1153, 2606.82us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> bs=1M:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/ parallel dio reads | READ 487779KB/s, 476, 8058.55us | WRITE 485592KB/s, 474, 8630.51us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> w/o parallel dio reads| READ 593927KB/s, 580, 7623.63us | WRITE 591265KB/s, 577, 6163.42us
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks,
> Joseph
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists