Hi, On 2025-02-11 18:45:13 +0100, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote: > On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 at 17:19, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Yes, at least initially: > > Ah, then I understand your point of view much better. Still I think we > could easily frame it as: If you enable io_uring, you also get these > additional fancy stats.
> Also afaict the items don't have to mean that > > > 1) it's not enabled on the kernel level everywhere > > Is that really a common thing to do? From a quick internet search, I > can "only" find that Google does this. (Google is definitely a big > cloud player, so I don't want to suggest that that is not important, > but if that's really the only one still the bulk of systems would have > io_uring support) RHEL had it disabled for quite a while, not sure if that's still the case. > > 2) it requires an optional build dependency > > What build dependency is this? Liburing. > In any case, can't we choose the default at build time based on the > available build dependencies? And if we cannot, I think we could always add > an "auto" default that would mean the best available AIO implementation > (where io_uring is better than bgworkers). We could, but because of 3) I don't want to do that right now. > > 3) it requires tuning the file descriptor ulimit, unless we can convince Tom > > that it's ok to do that ourselves > > I think we should just do this, given the reasoning in the blog[1] > from the systemd author I linked in the AIO thread. I agree that a > response/explicit approval from Tom would be nice though. I think it's the right path, but that's a fight to fight after AIO has been merged, not before. Greetings, Andres Freund
