[Devel] Re: [PATCH 0/9] cgroup: io-throttle controller (v13)
Andrew Morton
akpm at linux-foundation.org
Thu Apr 16 15:24:33 PDT 2009
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:21:11 +0200
Andrea Righi <righi.andrea at gmail.com> wrote:
> Objective
> ~~~~~~~~~
> The objective of the io-throttle controller is to improve IO performance
> predictability of different cgroups that share the same block devices.
We should get an IO controller into Linux. Does anyone have a reason
why it shouldn't be this one?
> Respect to other priority/weight-based solutions the approach used by
> this controller is to explicitly choke applications' requests
Yes, blocking the offending application at a high level has always
seemed to me to be the best way of implementing the controller.
> that
> directly or indirectly generate IO activity in the system (this
> controller addresses both synchronous IO and writeback/buffered IO).
The problem I've seen with some of the proposed controllers was that
they didn't handle delayed writeback very well, if at all.
Can you explain at a high level but in some detail how this works? If
an application is doing a huge write(), how is that detected and how is
the application made to throttle?
Does it add new metadata to `struct page' for this?
I assume that the write throttling is also wired up into the MAP_SHARED
write-fault path?
Does this patchset provide a path by which we can implement IO control
for (say) NFS mounts?
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Devel
mailing list