lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] dm-band: The I/O bandwidth controller: Performance Report
From
Hi,

> you mean that you run 128 processes on each user-device pairs? Namely,
> I guess that
>
> user1: 128 processes on sdb5,
> user2: 128 processes on sdb5,
> another: 128 processes on sdb5,
> user2: 128 processes on sdb6.

"User-device pairs" means "band groups", right?
What I actually did is the followings:

user1: 128 processes on sdb5,
user2: 128 processes on sdb5,
user3: 128 processes on sdb5,
user4: 128 processes on sdb6.

> The second preliminary studies might be:
> - What if you use a different I/O size on each device (or device-user pair)?
> - What if you use a different number of processes on each device (or
> device-user pair)?

There are other ideas of controlling bandwidth, limiting bytes-per-sec,
latency time or something. I think it is possible to implement it if
a lot of people really require it. I feel there wouldn't be a single
correct answer for this issue. Posting good ideas how it should work
and submitting patches for it are also welcome.

> And my impression is that it's natural dm-band is in device-mapper,
> separated from I/O scheduler. Because bandwidth control and I/O
> scheduling are two different things, it may be simpler that they are
> implemented in different layers.

I would like to know how dm-band works on various configurations on
various type of hardware. I'll try running dm-band on with other
configurations. Any reports or impressions of dm-band on your machines
are also welcome.

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-01-30 04:35    [W:0.054 / U:0.580 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site