|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
[lowering cleanerd priority]
However, may be a downside to /always/ running cleanerd niced and ioniced. Ibelieve that currently cleanerd's activity slows other processes down a lotwhen filesystem is almost full -- which means that it oftet won't become trulyfull, because clearned will free enough space for other processes to be able to complete their work. If, on the other hand, cleanerd was highly niced and ioniced, it could end up being starved of CPU and disk bandwidth and not freeing enough free space, which could cause other processes to exhaust freespace on filesystem and abord when not able to write to filesystem.
I was just thinking about that. This would only be an issue on a system that is either very constrained in terms of disk space or is never idle. though.
Perhaps it would be enough to have cleanerd automatically switch prioritybased on available free space. For example, if I had min_clean_segments 10% max_clean_segments 12% then also have min_clean_segments_low_prio 8% low_prio_nice 19 normal_prio_nice 0 low_prio_ionice_class idle normal_prio_ionice_class realtime which woud mean, `use low priority (nice & ionice) when there's at least 8% offree segments; if there's less use higher priority' -- so cleanerd would reclaim free space more aggressively when there's little free space left.
I was thinking about something similar. Realtime ionice is OTT, though, I don't think it should ever be ioniced over normal. But yes, I think this would be a good idea.
Gordan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html