Re: [PATCH 1/4] cfq: Increase default value of target_latency

[Jeff Moyer]

Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> writes:

> The existing CFQ default target_latency results in very poor performance
> for larger numbers of threads doing sequential reads.  While this can be
> easily described as a tuning problem for users, it is one that is tricky
> to detect. This patch the default on the assumption that people with access
> to expensive fast storage also know how to tune their IO scheduler.
>
> The following is from tiobench run on a mid-range desktop with a single
> spinning disk.
>
>                                       3.16.0-rc1            3.16.0-rc1                 3.0.0
>                                          vanilla          cfq600                     vanilla
> Mean   SeqRead-MB/sec-1         121.88 (  0.00%)      121.60 ( -0.23%)      134.59 ( 10.42%)
> Mean   SeqRead-MB/sec-2         101.99 (  0.00%)      102.35 (  0.36%)      122.59 ( 20.20%)
> Mean   SeqRead-MB/sec-4          97.42 (  0.00%)       99.71 (  2.35%)      114.78 ( 17.82%)
> Mean   SeqRead-MB/sec-8          83.39 (  0.00%)       90.39 (  8.39%)      100.14 ( 20.09%)
> Mean   SeqRead-MB/sec-16         68.90 (  0.00%)       77.29 ( 12.18%)       81.64 ( 18.50%)

Did you test any workloads other than this?  Also, what normal workload
has 8 or more threads doing sequential reads?  (That's an honest
question.)

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