From: Jan Kara <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Dan Williams <email@example.com> Cc: linux-ext4 <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Jan Kara <email@example.com>, "Berrocal, Eduardo" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: dax writes on ext4 slower than direct-i/o? Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 16:43:04 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190802144304.GP25064@quack2.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4g1g2i-9p1ZDqy596O-cbw3Gas2wdiv49EvM+b0i-1uLg@mail.gmail.com> Hi Dan! On Tue 30-07-19 16:49:41, Dan Williams wrote: > Eduardo raised a puzzling question about why dax yields lower iops > than direct-i/o. The expectation is the reverse, i.e. that direct-i/o > should be slightly slower than dax due to block layer overhead. This > holds true for xfs, but on ext4 dax yields half the iops of direct-i/o > for an fio 4K random write workload. > > Here is a relative graph of ext4: dax + direct-i/o vs xfs: dax + direct-i/o > > https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/56363/62172754-40c01e00-b2e8-11e9-8e4e-29e09940a171.jpg > > A relative perf profile seems to show more time in > ext4_journal_start() which I thought may be due to atime or mtime > updates, but those do not seem to be the source of the extra journal > I/O. > > The urgency is a curiosity at this point, but I expect an end user > might soon ask whether this is an expected implementation side-effect > of dax. > > Thanks in advance for any insight, and/or experiment ideas for us to go try. Yeah, I think the reason is that ext4_iomap_begin() currently starts a transaction unconditionally for each write whereas ext4_direct_IO_write() is more clever and starts a transaction only when needing to allocate any blocks. We could put similar smarts into ext4_iomap_begin() and it's probably a good idea, just at this moment I'm working with one guy on moving ext4 direct IO code to iomap infrastructure which overhauls ext4_iomap_begin() anyway, so let's do this after that work. Honza -- Jan Kara <email@example.com> SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-02 14:43 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-07-30 23:49 Dan Williams 2019-08-02 14:43 ` Jan Kara [this message] 2019-08-02 15:38 ` Dan Williams
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20190802144304.GP25064@quack2.suse.cz \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: dax writes on ext4 slower than direct-i/o?' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).