md/raid1: read balance chooses idlest disk for SSD
SSD hasn't spindle, distance between requests means nothing. And the original distance based algorithm sometimes can cause severe performance issue for SSD raid. Considering two thread groups, one accesses file A, the other access file B. The first group will access one disk and the second will access the other disk, because requests are near from one group and far between groups. In this case, read balance might keep one disk very busy but the other relative idle. For SSD, we should try best to distribute requests to as many disks as possible. There isn't spindle move penality anyway. With below patch, I can see more than 50% throughput improvement sometimes depending on workloads. The only exception is small requests can be merged to a big request which typically can drive higher throughput for SSD too. Such small requests are sequential reads. Unlike hard disk, sequential read which can't be merged (for example direct IO, or read without readahead) can be ignored for SSD. Again there is no spindle move penality. readahead dispatches small requests and such requests can be merged. Last patch can help detect sequential read well, at least if concurrent read number isn't greater than raid disk number. In that case, distance based algorithm doesn't work well too. V2: For hard disk and SSD mixed raid, doesn't use distance based algorithm for random IO too. This makes the algorithm generic for raid with SSD. Signed-off-by: NShaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: NNeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Showing
想要评论请 注册 或 登录