Re: [PATCH] 2.4.20-rmap15a

From: Willy Tarreau (willy@w.ods.org)
Date: Tue Dec 03 2002 - 01:21:49 EST


On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 09:10:03PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> > - not one, but two elevators, one for read requests, one for write requests.
> > - we would process one of the request queues (either reads or writes), and
> > after a user-settable amount of requests processed, we would switch to the
>
> OK, lets for the sake of the argument imagine such an
> elevator, with Read and Write queues for the following
> block numbers:
>
> R: 1 3 4 5 6 20 21 22 100 110 111
>
> W: 2 15 16 17 18 50 52 53
>
> Now imagine what switching randomly between these queues
> would do for disk seeks. Especially considering that some
> of the writes can be "sandwiched" in-between the reads...

Well, I don't speak about "random switching". My goal is exactly to reduce seek
time *and* to bound latency. Look at your example, considering that we put no
limit on the number of consecutive requests, just processing them in order would
give :

R(1), W(2), R(3,4,5,6), W(15,16,17,18), R(20,21,22), W(50,52,53), R(100,110,111)

This is about what is currently done with a single elevator. Now, if we try to
detect long runs of consecutive accesses based on seek length, we could
optimize it this way :

W(2), R(1-22), W(15-53), R(100-111) => we only do one backwards seek

And now, if you want to lower latency for a particular usage, with a 3:1
read/write ratio, this would give :

R(1,3,4), W(2), R(5,6,20), W(15), R(21,22,100), W(16), R(110,111), W(17-53)

Of course, this won't be globally optimal, but could perhaps help *some*
processes to wait less time for their data, which is the goal of inserting read
requests near the head of the queue, isn't it ?

BTW, just for my understanding, what would your example look like with the
current elevator (choose the ordering you like) ?

Cheers,
Willy

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 07 2002 - 22:00:15 EST