Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | Anticipatory IO scheduler |
| 2 | ------------------------- |
| 3 | Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au> 13 Sep 2003 |
| 4 | |
| 5 | Attention! Database servers, especially those using "TCQ" disks should |
| 6 | investigate performance with the 'deadline' IO scheduler. Any system with high |
| 7 | disk performance requirements should do so, in fact. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | If you see unusual performance characteristics of your disk systems, or you |
| 10 | see big performance regressions versus the deadline scheduler, please email |
| 11 | me. Database users don't bother unless you're willing to test a lot of patches |
| 12 | from me ;) its a known issue. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | Also, users with hardware RAID controllers, doing striping, may find |
| 15 | highly variable performance results with using the as-iosched. The |
| 16 | as-iosched anticipatory implementation is based on the notion that a disk |
| 17 | device has only one physical seeking head. A striped RAID controller |
| 18 | actually has a head for each physical device in the logical RAID device. |
| 19 | |
| 20 | However, setting the antic_expire (see tunable parameters below) produces |
| 21 | very similar behavior to the deadline IO scheduler. |
| 22 | |
| 23 | |
| 24 | Selecting IO schedulers |
| 25 | ----------------------- |
| 26 | To choose IO schedulers at boot time, use the argument 'elevator=deadline'. |
Filipe | 49033c8 | 2006-12-06 20:36:04 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 27 | 'noop', 'as' and 'cfq' (the default) are also available. IO schedulers are |
| 28 | assigned globally at boot time only presently. It's also possible to change |
| 29 | the IO scheduler for a determined device on the fly, as described in |
| 30 | Documentation/block/switching-sched.txt. |
Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 31 | |
| 32 | |
| 33 | Anticipatory IO scheduler Policies |
| 34 | ---------------------------------- |
| 35 | The as-iosched implementation implements several layers of policies |
| 36 | to determine when an IO request is dispatched to the disk controller. |
| 37 | Here are the policies outlined, in order of application. |
| 38 | |
| 39 | 1. one-way Elevator algorithm. |
| 40 | |
| 41 | The elevator algorithm is similar to that used in deadline scheduler, with |
| 42 | the addition that it allows limited backward movement of the elevator |
| 43 | (i.e. seeks backwards). A seek backwards can occur when choosing between |
| 44 | two IO requests where one is behind the elevator's current position, and |
| 45 | the other is in front of the elevator's position. If the seek distance to |
| 46 | the request in back of the elevator is less than half the seek distance to |
| 47 | the request in front of the elevator, then the request in back can be chosen. |
| 48 | Backward seeks are also limited to a maximum of MAXBACK (1024*1024) sectors. |
| 49 | This favors forward movement of the elevator, while allowing opportunistic |
| 50 | "short" backward seeks. |
| 51 | |
| 52 | 2. FIFO expiration times for reads and for writes. |
| 53 | |
| 54 | This is again very similar to the deadline IO scheduler. The expiration |
| 55 | times for requests on these lists is tunable using the parameters read_expire |
| 56 | and write_expire discussed below. When a read or a write expires in this way, |
| 57 | the IO scheduler will interrupt its current elevator sweep or read anticipation |
| 58 | to service the expired request. |
| 59 | |
| 60 | 3. Read and write request batching |
| 61 | |
| 62 | A batch is a collection of read requests or a collection of write |
| 63 | requests. The as scheduler alternates dispatching read and write batches |
| 64 | to the driver. In the case a read batch, the scheduler submits read |
| 65 | requests to the driver as long as there are read requests to submit, and |
| 66 | the read batch time limit has not been exceeded (read_batch_expire). |
| 67 | The read batch time limit begins counting down only when there are |
| 68 | competing write requests pending. |
| 69 | |
| 70 | In the case of a write batch, the scheduler submits write requests to |
| 71 | the driver as long as there are write requests available, and the |
| 72 | write batch time limit has not been exceeded (write_batch_expire). |
| 73 | However, the length of write batches will be gradually shortened |
| 74 | when read batches frequently exceed their time limit. |
| 75 | |
| 76 | When changing between batch types, the scheduler waits for all requests |
| 77 | from the previous batch to complete before scheduling requests for the |
| 78 | next batch. |
| 79 | |
| 80 | The read and write fifo expiration times described in policy 2 above |
| 81 | are checked only when in scheduling IO of a batch for the corresponding |
| 82 | (read/write) type. So for example, the read FIFO timeout values are |
| 83 | tested only during read batches. Likewise, the write FIFO timeout |
| 84 | values are tested only during write batches. For this reason, |
| 85 | it is generally not recommended for the read batch time |
| 86 | to be longer than the write expiration time, nor for the write batch |
| 87 | time to exceed the read expiration time (see tunable parameters below). |
| 88 | |
| 89 | When the IO scheduler changes from a read to a write batch, |
| 90 | it begins the elevator from the request that is on the head of the |
| 91 | write expiration FIFO. Likewise, when changing from a write batch to |
| 92 | a read batch, scheduler begins the elevator from the first entry |
| 93 | on the read expiration FIFO. |
| 94 | |
| 95 | 4. Read anticipation. |
| 96 | |
| 97 | Read anticipation occurs only when scheduling a read batch. |
| 98 | This implementation of read anticipation allows only one read request |
| 99 | to be dispatched to the disk controller at a time. In |
| 100 | contrast, many write requests may be dispatched to the disk controller |
| 101 | at a time during a write batch. It is this characteristic that can make |
| 102 | the anticipatory scheduler perform anomalously with controllers supporting |
| 103 | TCQ, or with hardware striped RAID devices. Setting the antic_expire |
Matt LaPlante | 992caac | 2006-10-03 22:52:05 +0200 | [diff] [blame] | 104 | queue parameter (see below) to zero disables this behavior, and the |
| 105 | anticipatory scheduler behaves essentially like the deadline scheduler. |
Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 106 | |
| 107 | When read anticipation is enabled (antic_expire is not zero), reads |
| 108 | are dispatched to the disk controller one at a time. |
| 109 | At the end of each read request, the IO scheduler examines its next |
| 110 | candidate read request from its sorted read list. If that next request |
| 111 | is from the same process as the request that just completed, |
| 112 | or if the next request in the queue is "very close" to the |
| 113 | just completed request, it is dispatched immediately. Otherwise, |
| 114 | statistics (average think time, average seek distance) on the process |
| 115 | that submitted the just completed request are examined. If it seems |
| 116 | likely that that process will submit another request soon, and that |
| 117 | request is likely to be near the just completed request, then the IO |
| 118 | scheduler will stop dispatching more read requests for up time (antic_expire) |
| 119 | milliseconds, hoping that process will submit a new request near the one |
| 120 | that just completed. If such a request is made, then it is dispatched |
| 121 | immediately. If the antic_expire wait time expires, then the IO scheduler |
| 122 | will dispatch the next read request from the sorted read queue. |
| 123 | |
| 124 | To decide whether an anticipatory wait is worthwhile, the scheduler |
| 125 | maintains statistics for each process that can be used to compute |
| 126 | mean "think time" (the time between read requests), and mean seek |
| 127 | distance for that process. One observation is that these statistics |
| 128 | are associated with each process, but those statistics are not associated |
| 129 | with a specific IO device. So for example, if a process is doing IO |
| 130 | on several file systems on separate devices, the statistics will be |
| 131 | a combination of IO behavior from all those devices. |
| 132 | |
| 133 | |
| 134 | Tuning the anticipatory IO scheduler |
| 135 | ------------------------------------ |
| 136 | When using 'as', the anticipatory IO scheduler there are 5 parameters under |
| 137 | /sys/block/*/queue/iosched/. All are units of milliseconds. |
| 138 | |
| 139 | The parameters are: |
| 140 | * read_expire |
| 141 | Controls how long until a read request becomes "expired". It also controls the |
| 142 | interval between which expired requests are served, so set to 50, a request |
| 143 | might take anywhere < 100ms to be serviced _if_ it is the next on the |
| 144 | expired list. Obviously request expiration strategies won't make the disk |
| 145 | go faster. The result basically equates to the timeslice a single reader |
| 146 | gets in the presence of other IO. 100*((seek time / read_expire) + 1) is |
| 147 | very roughly the % streaming read efficiency your disk should get with |
| 148 | multiple readers. |
| 149 | |
| 150 | * read_batch_expire |
| 151 | Controls how much time a batch of reads is given before pending writes are |
| 152 | served. A higher value is more efficient. This might be set below read_expire |
| 153 | if writes are to be given higher priority than reads, but reads are to be |
| 154 | as efficient as possible when there are no writes. Generally though, it |
| 155 | should be some multiple of read_expire. |
| 156 | |
| 157 | * write_expire, and |
| 158 | * write_batch_expire are equivalent to the above, for writes. |
| 159 | |
| 160 | * antic_expire |
| 161 | Controls the maximum amount of time we can anticipate a good read (one |
| 162 | with a short seek distance from the most recently completed request) before |
| 163 | giving up. Many other factors may cause anticipation to be stopped early, |
| 164 | or some processes will not be "anticipated" at all. Should be a bit higher |
| 165 | for big seek time devices though not a linear correspondence - most |
| 166 | processes have only a few ms thinktime. |
| 167 | |