Sam/Sage, I saw Giant is forked off today. We need the pull request (https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/2440) to be in Giant. So, could you please merge this into Giant when it will be ready ?
Thanks & Regards Somnath -----Original Message----- From: Samuel Just [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 11:31 AM To: Somnath Roy Cc: Sage Weil; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: OpTracker optimization Just added it to wip-sam-testing. -Sam On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Somnath Roy <[email protected]> wrote: > Sam/Sage, > I have addressed all of your comments and pushed the changes to the same pull > request. > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/2440 > > Thanks & Regards > Somnath > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sage Weil [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 8:33 PM > To: Somnath Roy > Cc: Samuel Just; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: OpTracker optimization > > I had two substantiative comments on the first patch and then some trivial > whitespace nits. Otherwise looks good! > > tahnks- > sage > > On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Somnath Roy wrote: > >> Sam/Sage, >> I have incorporated all of your comments. Please have a look at the same >> pull request. >> >> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/2440 >> >> Thanks & Regards >> Somnath >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Samuel Just [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 3:25 PM >> To: Somnath Roy >> Cc: Sage Weil ([email protected]); [email protected]; >> [email protected] >> Subject: Re: OpTracker optimization >> >> Oh, I changed my mind, your approach is fine. I was unclear. >> Currently, I just need you to address the other comments. >> -Sam >> >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Somnath Roy <[email protected]> wrote: >> > As I understand, you want me to implement the following. >> > >> > 1. Keep this implementation one sharded optracker for the ios going >> > through ms_dispatch path. >> > >> > 2. Additionally, for ios going through ms_fast_dispatch, you want >> > me to implement optracker (without internal shard) per opwq shard >> > >> > Am I right ? >> > >> > Thanks & Regards >> > Somnath >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Samuel Just [mailto:[email protected]] >> > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 3:08 PM >> > To: Somnath Roy >> > Cc: Sage Weil ([email protected]); [email protected]; >> > [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: OpTracker optimization >> > >> > I don't quite understand. >> > -Sam >> > >> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Somnath Roy <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> Thanks Sam. >> >> So, you want me to go with optracker/shadedopWq , right ? >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> Somnath >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Samuel Just [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 2:36 PM >> >> To: Somnath Roy >> >> Cc: Sage Weil ([email protected]); [email protected]; >> >> [email protected] >> >> Subject: Re: OpTracker optimization >> >> >> >> Responded with cosmetic nonsense. Once you've got that and the other >> >> comments addressed, I can put it in wip-sam-testing. >> >> -Sam >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Somnath Roy <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Sam..I responded back :-) >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: [email protected] >> >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Samuel >> >>> Just >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 11:17 AM >> >>> To: Somnath Roy >> >>> Cc: Sage Weil ([email protected]); [email protected]; >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> Subject: Re: OpTracker optimization >> >>> >> >>> Added a comment about the approach. >> >>> -Sam >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Somnath Roy <[email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> Hi Sam/Sage, >> >>>> >> >>>> As we discussed earlier, enabling the present OpTracker code >> >>>> degrading performance severely. For example, in my setup a >> >>>> single OSD node with >> >>>> 10 clients is reaching ~103K read iops with io served from >> >>>> memory while optracking is disabled but enabling optracker it is >> >>>> reduced to ~39K iops. >> >>>> Probably, running OSD without enabling OpTracker is not an >> >>>> option for many of Ceph users. >> >>>> >> >>>> Now, by sharding the Optracker:: ops_in_flight_lock (thus xlist >> >>>> ops_in_flight) and removing some other bottlenecks I am able to >> >>>> match the performance of OpTracking enabled OSD with OpTracking >> >>>> disabled, but with the expense of ~1 extra cpu core. >> >>>> >> >>>> In this process I have also fixed the following tracker. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/9384 >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> and probably http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/8885 too. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> I have created following pull request for the same. Please review it. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/2440 >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Thanks & Regards >> >>>> >> >>>> Somnath >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> ________________________________ >> >>>> >> >>>> PLEASE NOTE: The information contained in this electronic mail >> >>>> message is intended only for the use of the designated >> >>>> recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not >> >>>> the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have >> >>>> received this message in error and that any review, >> >>>> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is >> >>>> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in >> >>>> error, please notify the sender by telephone or e-mail (as shown >> >>>> above) immediately and destroy any and all copies of this message in >> >>>> your possession (whether hard copies or electronically stored copies). >> >>>> >> >>> -- >> >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" >> >>> in the body of a message to [email protected] More >> >>> majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> >>> >> >>> ________________________________ >> >>> >> >>> PLEASE NOTE: The information contained in this electronic mail message >> >>> is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s) named above. >> >>> If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are >> >>> hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that >> >>> any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is >> >>> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, >> >>> please notify the sender by telephone or e-mail (as shown above) >> >>> immediately and destroy any and all copies of this message in your >> >>> possession (whether hard copies or electronically stored copies). >> >>> >>
