Re: [Xen-devel] 4.1 feature request: block device throttling/sc

To:	Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] 4.1 feature request: block device throttling/scheduling
From:	T Johnson <tjohnson46@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Fri, 9 Apr 2010 19:46:10 -0400
Cc:	xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date:	Fri, 09 Apr 2010 16:47:06 -0700
Dkim-signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=s7XT1OwTq7EJgj9mze4NmFf+hrRdlkeND6q7LOZWoQE=; b=kG8jfZfUF7aMrgh3TkiB0EJsCQv9K/QsaTVARaEzMBqe3kJRiE2X1DTbeHDUmSrBM2 qCdb9xxHoGxKVttc0GTF55/HBxPuUIbtQjrb3Xci5U79fptsu7UVIBapowbd9bJ26D91 MP9HfwWyvx82bkB5gMWtUtXFZZeZ0JeU2/EiQ=
Domainkey-signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=Pwrf1c35MAloGIkZuEmdIVf9QnQ+LxtLE5Du+e5M2qLKuWVl4OkW2KBNvlyRjx3NP6 L0S0kCnePq6KiMs0bpsb3s83JLkQh7H3AzZNocMFRZJDHOd0tWk+gAV++VCNsvq3/3AS 66jF4rdNp/rJAuamq3VtZLEugvVfVWP2Ei9Pg=
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20100409164722.GU1878@xxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References:	<q2k85641b261004090913za71972acpeea1b73e87164973@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100409164722.GU1878@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 12:13:32PM -0400, T Johnson wrote:

> In an ideal world I could specify that vmX can perform Y writes per second
> and Z reads per second (since sometimes reads can be less expensive than
> writes)
>
> Please let me know if you have any questions. Adding something like this
> in would be *greatly* appreciated.
>

Did you take a look at dm-ioband?

I did, but unless I'm missing something it doesn't work too well for storage networks (especially NFS) when you're using

file-backed block devices. Also, I'd rather have limits on the ops/sec rather than just prioritization.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] 4.1 feature request: block device throttling/scheduling