[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090321035315.fc10cef6.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 03:53:15 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jos Houtman <jos@...es.nl>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: Page Cache writeback too slow, SSD/noop scheduler/ext2
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:26:06 +0100 Jos Houtman <jos@...es.nl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have hit a problem where the page-cache writeback algorithm is not
> keeping up.
> When memory gets low this will result in very irregular performance drops.
>
> Our setup is as follows:
> 30 x Quad core machine with 64GB ram.
> These are single purpose machines running MySQL.
> Kernel version: 2.6.28.7
> A dedicated SSD drive for the ext2 database partition
> Noop scheduler for the ssd drive.
>
>
> The current hypothesis is as follows:
> The wk_update function does not write enough dirty pages, which allows the
> number of dirty pages to grow to the dirty_background limit.
> When memory is low, __background_writeout() comes around and __forcefully__
> writes dirty pages to disk.
> This forced write fills the disk queue and starves read calls that MySQL is
> trying to do: basically killing performance for a few seconds.
> This pattern repeats as soon as the cleared memory is filled again.
>
> Decreasing the dirty_writeback_centisecs to 100 doesn__t help
>
> I don__t know why this is, but I did some preliminary tracing using systemtap
> and it seems that the majority of times wk_update calls decides to do
> nothing.
>
> Doubling /sys/block/sdb/queue/nr_requests to 256, seems to help abit: the
> nr_dirty pages is increasing more slowly.
> But I am unsure of side-effects and am afraid of increasing the starvation
> problem for mysql.
>
>
> I__am very much willing to work on this issue and see it fixed, but would
> like to tap into the knowledge of people here.
> So:
> * Have more people seen this or simular issues?
> * Is the hypothesis above a viable one?
> * Suggestions/pointers for further research and statistics I should measure
> to improve the understanding of this problem.
>
I don't think that noop-iosched tries to do anything to prevent
writes-starve-reads. Do you get better behaviour from any of the other IO
schedulers?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists