On 2018/5/26 3:49, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> The fstrim gathers huge number of large discard commands, and tries to issue
> without IO awareness, which results in long user-perceive IO latencies on
> READ, WRITE, and FLUSH in UFS. We've observed some of commands take several
> seconds due to long
On 2018/5/26 3:49, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> The fstrim gathers huge number of large discard commands, and tries to issue
> without IO awareness, which results in long user-perceive IO latencies on
> READ, WRITE, and FLUSH in UFS. We've observed some of commands take several
> seconds due to long
On 2018/5/26 3:49, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> The fstrim gathers huge number of large discard commands, and tries to issue
> without IO awareness, which results in long user-perceive IO latencies on
> READ, WRITE, and FLUSH in UFS. We've observed some of commands take several
> seconds due to long
On 2018/5/26 3:49, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> The fstrim gathers huge number of large discard commands, and tries to issue
> without IO awareness, which results in long user-perceive IO latencies on
> READ, WRITE, and FLUSH in UFS. We've observed some of commands take several
> seconds due to long
The fstrim gathers huge number of large discard commands, and tries to issue
without IO awareness, which results in long user-perceive IO latencies on
READ, WRITE, and FLUSH in UFS. We've observed some of commands take several
seconds due to long discard latency.
This patch limits the maximum
The fstrim gathers huge number of large discard commands, and tries to issue
without IO awareness, which results in long user-perceive IO latencies on
READ, WRITE, and FLUSH in UFS. We've observed some of commands take several
seconds due to long discard latency.
This patch limits the maximum
6 matches
Mail list logo