[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1254494742.7307.37.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:45:42 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Ulrich Lukas <stellplatz-nr.13a@...enparkplatz.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
nauman@...gle.com, dpshah@...gle.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
mikew@...gle.com, fchecconi@...il.com, paolo.valente@...more.it,
ryov@...inux.co.jp, fernando@....ntt.co.jp, jmoyer@...hat.com,
dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
righi.andrea@...il.com, m-ikeda@...jp.nec.com, agk@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org,
jmarchan@...hat.com, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: IO scheduler based IO controller V10
On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 07:24 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >
> > It's really not that simple, if we go and do easy latency bits, then
> > throughput drops 30% or more.
>
> Well, if we're talking 500-950% improvement vs 30% deprovement, I think
> it's pretty clear, though. Even the server people do care about latencies.
>
> Often they care quite a bit, in fact.
>
> And Mike's patch didn't look big or complicated.
But it is a hack. (thought about and measured, but hack nonetheless)
I haven't tested it on much other than reader vs streaming writer. It
may well destroy the rest of the IO universe. I don't have the hw to
even test any hairy chested IO.
-Mike
--
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