Hi,
Hi All,
I have got excellent results of dm-ioband, that controls the disk I/O
bandwidth even when it accepts delayed write requests.
In this time, I ran some benchmarks with a high-end storage. The
reason was to avoid a performance bottleneck due to mechanical factors
such
Hi Tsuruta-san,
Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
Hi All,
I have got excellent results of dm-ioband, that controls the disk I/O
bandwidth even when it accepts delayed write requests.
In this time, I ran some benchmarks with a high-end storage. The
reason was to avoid a performance bottleneck due to
Hi everyone,
Here are new releases of bio-cgroup.
Changes from the previous version are as follows:
- Accurate dirty-page tracking
Support migrating pages between bio-cgroups with minimum overhead,
but I think such a situation is quite rare.
- Fix a bug of swapcache page handling
This patch splits the cgroup memory subsystem into two parts.
One is for tracking pages to find out the owners. The other is
for controlling how much amount of memory should be assigned to
each cgroup.
With this patch, you can use the page tracking mechanism even if
the memory subsystem is off.
This patch implements the bio cgroup on the memory cgroup.
Based on 2.6.27-rc1-mm1
Signed-off-by: Ryo Tsuruta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Hirokazu Takahashi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff -Ndupr linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1.cg1/block/blk-ioc.c
linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1.cg2/block/blk-ioc.c
---
This patch supports migrating pages between bio-cgroups with minimum overhead,
Based on 2.6.27-rc1-mm1
Signed-off-by: Ryo Tsuruta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Hirokazu Takahashi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff -Ndupr linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1.cg3/fs/buffer.c
linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1.cg4/fs/buffer.c
---
With this patch, dm-ioband can work with the bio cgroup.
Based on 2.6.27-rc1-mm1
Signed-off-by: Ryo Tsuruta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Hirokazu Takahashi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff -Ndupr linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1.cg2/drivers/md/dm-ioband-type.c
linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1.cg3/drivers/md/dm-ioband-type.c
Hi,
Hi All,
I have got excellent results of dm-ioband, that controls the disk I/O
bandwidth even when it accepts delayed write requests.
In this time, I ran some benchmarks with a high-end storage. The
reason was to avoid a performance bottleneck due to mechanical factors
such
Hi Yoshikawa-san,
When you have time, would you explain me how you succeeded to check the
time, bandwidth, especially when you did write() tests? Actually, I tried
similar tests and failed to check the bandwidth correctly. Did you insert
something in the kernel source?
I'm using our own
Hi,
Hi everyone,
Here are new releases of bio-cgroup.
Changes from the previous version are as follows:
- Accurate dirty-page tracking
Support migrating pages between bio-cgroups with minimum overhead,
I'm the one implementing this code.
The implementation isn't finished yet that this
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 03:12:21PM +0900, Hirokazu Takahashi wrote:
Hi,
Hi All,
I have got excellent results of dm-ioband, that controls the disk I/O
bandwidth even when it accepts delayed write requests.
In this time, I ran some benchmarks with a high-end storage. The
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 08:20:31PM +0900, Hirokazu Takahashi wrote:
Hi,
Hi All,
I have got excellent results of dm-ioband, that controls the disk I/O
bandwidth even when it accepts delayed write requests.
In this time, I ran some benchmarks with a high-end storage. The
Ok I'm happy with this patch set. It appears correct as far as the tty
side is concerned, it looks sensible in terms of interface with the
devpts layer.
Really depends what everyone else thinks about the vfs bits and the API
___
Containers mailing list
Alan Cox wrote:
Ok I'm happy with this patch set. It appears correct as far as the tty
side is concerned, it looks sensible in terms of interface with the
devpts layer.
Really depends what everyone else thinks about the vfs bits and the API
The last version looks fine to me. To be fair, I
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:05:24 +0200 Andrea Righi wrote:
Introduce res_counter_ratelimit as a generic structure to implement
throttling-based cgroup subsystems.
[ Only the interfaces needed by the IO controller are implemented right now ]
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 08:20:31PM +0900, Hirokazu Takahashi wrote:
To avoid creation of stacking another device (dm-ioband) on top of every
device we want to subject to rules, I was thinking of maintaining an
rb-tree per request queue. Requests will first go into this
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:05:24 +0200 Andrea Righi wrote:
Introduce res_counter_ratelimit as a generic structure to implement
throttling-based cgroup subsystems.
[ Only the interfaces needed by the IO controller are implemented right now ]
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi
On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:34:05 +0900 (JST)
Hirokazu Takahashi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've decided to get Ryo to post the accurate dirty-page tracking patch
for bio-cgroup, which isn't perfect yet though. The memory controller
never wants to support this tracking because migrating a page
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:34:05 +0900 (JST)
Hirokazu Takahashi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've decided to get Ryo to post the accurate dirty-page tracking patch
for bio-cgroup, which isn't perfect yet though. The memory controller
never wants to support this tracking
19 matches
Mail list logo
