On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Haomai Wang wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:41 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, changtao381 wrote:
>> >> Hi All,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for you apply!
>> >>
>> >> If
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:41 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, changtao381 wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Thanks for you apply!
>>
>> If directioIO + async IO requirement that alignment, it shouldn't aligned by
>> PAGE for each journal entry.
>> For it may write many
Do you see any performance difference between direct io and non direct io
mode?
If it¹s disabled, you don¹t need any buffer alignment.
On 11/20/15, 5:29 AM, "ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org on behalf of
Haomai Wang" wrote:
>On
Hi All,
Thanks for you apply!
If directioIO + async IO requirement that alignment, it shouldn't aligned by
PAGE for each journal entry.
For it may write many entries of journal once time
So it should do alignment after [prepare_multi_write] rather than do it each in
[prepare_single_write] ?
Yes, You are right. But in ceph master branch, we have already
prepare_entry(add padding) before sumibt_entry. If you have good idea
base on this,
It would be great.
2015-11-20 17:12 GMT+08:00 changtao381 :
> Hi All,
>
> Thanks for you apply!
>
> If directioIO + async IO
Because we should keep the logic of journal write thread simple. It
performs better in pcie ssd. But I think the strategy you mentioned
above is good for hdd or sata ssd.
2015-11-20 17:16 GMT+08:00 池信泽 :
> Yes, You are right. But in ceph master branch, we have already
>