| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] bump up nr_to_write in xfs_vm_writepage |
| From: | Olaf Weber <olaf@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:37:05 +0200 |
| Cc: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, "MASON, CHRISTOPHER" <CHRIS.MASON@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs mailing list <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20090707101946.GB1934@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Christoph Hellwig's message of "Tue, 7 Jul 2009 06:19:46 -0400") |
| References: | <4A4D26C5.9070606@xxxxxxxxxx> <bzyd48cc14d.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090707101946.GB1934@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.3 (irix) |
Christoph Hellwig writes:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 11:07:30AM +0200, Olaf Weber wrote:
>> If the nr_to_write calculation really yields a value that is too
>> small, shouldn't it be fixed elsewhere?
> In theory it should. But given the amazing feedback of the VM people
> on this I'd rather make sure we do get the full HW bandwith on large
> arrays instead of sucking badly and not just wait forever.
So how do you feel about making the fudge factor tunable? I don't
have a good sense myself of what the value should be, whether the
hard-coded 4 is good enough in general.
--
Olaf Weber SGI Phone: +31(0)30-6696752
Veldzigt 2b Fax: +31(0)30-6696799
Technical Lead 3454 PW de Meern Vnet: 955-7151
Storage Software The Netherlands Email: olaf@xxxxxxx
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] bump up nr_to_write in xfs_vm_writepage, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add tests to check log size scaling, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] bump up nr_to_write in xfs_vm_writepage, Chris Mason |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] bump up nr_to_write in xfs_vm_writepage, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |