| To: | Linux-MM <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Reduce filesystem writeback from page reclaim (again) |
| From: | Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 13 Jul 2011 16:31:30 +0100 |
| Cc: | LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Johannes Weiner <jweiner@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx>, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <1310567487-15367-1-git-send-email-mgorman@xxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1310567487-15367-1-git-send-email-mgorman@xxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 03:31:22PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > <SNIP> > The objective of the series - reducing writes from reclaim - is > met with filesystem writes from reclaim reduced to 0 with reclaim > in general doing less work. ext3, ext4 and xfs all showed marked > improvements for fs_mark in this configuration. btrfs looked worse > but it's within the noise and I'd expect the patches to have little > or no impact there due it ignoring ->writepage from reclaim. > My bad, I accidentally looked at an old report for btrfs based on older patches. In the report posted with all patches applied, the performance of btrfs does look better but as the patches should make no difference, it's still in the noise. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | suse cp copies 'acls' and extended attrs...., Linda A. Walsh |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH] xfs [stable only]: restart busy extent search after node removal, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 5/5] mm: writeback: Prioritise dirty inodes encountered by direct reclaim for background flushing, Mel Gorman |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Reduce filesystem writeback from page reclaim (again), Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |