Jens Axboe writes:
>>> The problem is really that the WRITE_SYNC is (for Jan's case) behaving
>>> like buffered writes, so it eats up a queue of requests very easily. On
>>> the allocation side, the assumption is that WRITE_SYNC behaves like
>>> dependent reads. Similar to a dd with
Jens Axboe ax...@kernel.dk writes:
The problem is really that the WRITE_SYNC is (for Jan's case) behaving
like buffered writes, so it eats up a queue of requests very easily. On
the allocation side, the assumption is that WRITE_SYNC behaves like
dependent reads. Similar to a dd with
On 2012-12-13 16:02, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 13-12-12 14:30:42, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2012-12-12 20:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>>> Jeff Moyer writes:
>>>
> I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
> yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this
On Thu 13-12-12 14:30:42, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2012-12-12 20:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > Jeff Moyer writes:
> >
> >>> I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
> >>> yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
> >>> obviously wasn't there.
Jens Axboe writes:
> On 2012-12-12 20:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Jeff Moyer writes:
>>
I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
obviously wasn't there. Now we have sync writes and
On 2012-12-12 20:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jeff Moyer writes:
>
>>> I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
>>> yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
>>> obviously wasn't there. Now we have sync writes and reads, both eating
>>> from
On Wed 12-12-12 14:41:13, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jeff Moyer writes:
>
> >> I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
> >> yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
> >> obviously wasn't there. Now we have sync writes and reads, both eating
>
On Thu 13-12-12 09:43:31, Shaohua Li wrote:
> 2012/12/12 Jan Kara :
> > On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >> 2012/12/11 Jan Kara :
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes
> >> > (in
> >> > my case from kjournald but DIO would
On Thu 13-12-12 09:43:31, Shaohua Li wrote:
2012/12/12 Jan Kara j...@suse.cz:
On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
2012/12/11 Jan Kara j...@suse.cz:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes
(in
my case from kjournald but DIO would
On Wed 12-12-12 14:41:13, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jeff Moyer jmo...@redhat.com writes:
I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
obviously wasn't there. Now we have sync writes and reads, both
On 2012-12-12 20:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jeff Moyer jmo...@redhat.com writes:
I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
obviously wasn't there. Now we have sync writes and reads, both eating
from
Jens Axboe ax...@kernel.dk writes:
On 2012-12-12 20:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jeff Moyer jmo...@redhat.com writes:
I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
obviously wasn't there. Now we have
On Thu 13-12-12 14:30:42, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 2012-12-12 20:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jeff Moyer jmo...@redhat.com writes:
I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
obviously wasn't there.
On 2012-12-13 16:02, Jan Kara wrote:
On Thu 13-12-12 14:30:42, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 2012-12-12 20:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jeff Moyer jmo...@redhat.com writes:
I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this
2012/12/12 Jan Kara :
> On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
>> 2012/12/11 Jan Kara :
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
>> > my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
>> > because reads happen in
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:26:17AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 12-12-12 15:18:21, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 03:31:37AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Tue 11-12-12 16:44:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > > > Jan Kara writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I was
Jeff Moyer writes:
>> I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
>> yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
>> obviously wasn't there. Now we have sync writes and reads, both eating
>> from the same pool. The io scheduler can impact this a
Jens Axboe writes:
> On 2012-12-12 11:11, Jan Kara wrote:
>> On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
>>> 2012/12/11 Jan Kara :
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve
On 2012-12-12 11:11, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
>> 2012/12/11 Jan Kara :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
>>> my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
>>> because reads
On Wed 12-12-12 15:18:21, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 03:31:37AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 11-12-12 16:44:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > > Jan Kara writes:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes
> > > >
On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
> 2012/12/11 Jan Kara :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
> > my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
> > because reads happen in small chunks and until a
On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
2012/12/11 Jan Kara j...@suse.cz:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads happen in small chunks and until a
On Wed 12-12-12 15:18:21, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 03:31:37AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 11-12-12 16:44:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jan Kara j...@suse.cz writes:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes
(in
my case
On 2012-12-12 11:11, Jan Kara wrote:
On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
2012/12/11 Jan Kara j...@suse.cz:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads happen
Jens Axboe ax...@kernel.dk writes:
On 2012-12-12 11:11, Jan Kara wrote:
On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
2012/12/11 Jan Kara j...@suse.cz:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve
Jeff Moyer jmo...@redhat.com writes:
I agree. This isn't about scheduling, we haven't even reached that part
yet. Back when we split the queues into read vs write, this problem
obviously wasn't there. Now we have sync writes and reads, both eating
from the same pool. The io scheduler can
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:26:17AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
On Wed 12-12-12 15:18:21, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 03:31:37AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 11-12-12 16:44:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jan Kara j...@suse.cz writes:
Hi,
I was looking into IO
2012/12/12 Jan Kara j...@suse.cz:
On Wed 12-12-12 10:55:15, Shaohua Li wrote:
2012/12/11 Jan Kara j...@suse.cz:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 03:31:37AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 11-12-12 16:44:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > Jan Kara writes:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes
> > > (in
> > > my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same)
2012/12/11 Jan Kara :
> Hi,
>
> I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
> my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
> because reads happen in small chunks and until a request completes we don't
> start reading further (reader
On Tue 11-12-12 16:44:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jan Kara writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
> > my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
> > because reads happen in small chunks and until a
On Monday 2012-12-10 23:12, Jan Kara wrote:
>
> I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
>my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
>because reads happen in small chunks and until a request completes we don't
>start reading further
Jan Kara writes:
> Hi,
>
> I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
> my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
> because reads happen in small chunks and until a request completes we don't
> start reading further (reader reads
Jan Kara j...@suse.cz writes:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads happen in small chunks and until a request completes we don't
start reading further (reader
On Monday 2012-12-10 23:12, Jan Kara wrote:
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads happen in small chunks and until a request completes we don't
start reading further
On Tue 11-12-12 16:44:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jan Kara j...@suse.cz writes:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads happen in small chunks and until a
2012/12/11 Jan Kara j...@suse.cz:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads happen in small chunks and until a request completes we don't
start reading further
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 03:31:37AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 11-12-12 16:44:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Jan Kara j...@suse.cz writes:
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes
(in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads happen in small chunks and until a request completes we don't
start reading further (reader reads lots of small files) while
Hi,
I was looking into IO starvation problems where streaming sync writes (in
my case from kjournald but DIO would look the same) starve reads. This is
because reads happen in small chunks and until a request completes we don't
start reading further (reader reads lots of small files) while
40 matches
Mail list logo
