Reduce dirty records memory usage #16694
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
amotin
force-pushed
the
dbuf_dirty_kmem
branch
from
903dea0
to
fd4ccf1
Compare
Small block workloads may use a very large number of dirty records. During simple block cloning test due to BRT still using 4KB blocks I can easily see up to 2.5M of those used. Before this change dbuf_dirty_record_t structures representing them were allocated via kmem_zalloc(), that rounded their size up to 512 bytes. Introduction of specialized kmem cache allows to reduce the size from 512 to 408 bytes. Additionally, since override and raw params in dirty records are mutually exclusive, puting them into a union allows to reduce structure size down to 368 bytes, increasing the saving to 28%, that can be a 0.5GB or more of RAM. Signed-off-by: Alexander Motin <[email protected]> Sponsored by: iXsystems, Inc.
amotin
force-pushed
the
dbuf_dirty_kmem
branch
from
fd4ccf1
to
fa144d9
Compare
amotin
added
Status: Code Review Needed
bwatkinson
approved these changes
Nov 5, 2024
behlendorf
added
Status: Accepted
behlendorf
pushed a commit
to behlendorf/zfs
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 5, 2024
Small block workloads may use a very large number of dirty records. During simple block cloning test due to BRT still using 4KB blocks I can easily see up to 2.5M of those used. Before this change dbuf_dirty_record_t structures representing them were allocated via kmem_zalloc(), that rounded their size up to 512 bytes. Introduction of specialized kmem cache allows to reduce the size from 512 to 408 bytes. Additionally, since override and raw params in dirty records are mutually exclusive, puting them into a union allows to reduce structure size down to 368 bytes, increasing the saving to 28%, that can be a 0.5GB or more of RAM. Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Brian Atkinson <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexander Motin <[email protected]> Sponsored by: iXsystems, Inc. Closes openzfs#16694
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Small block workloads may use a very large number of dirty records. During simple block cloning test due to BRT still using 4KB blocks I can easily see up to 2.5M of those used. Before this change dbuf_dirty_record_t structures representing them were allocated via kmem_zalloc(), that rounded their size up to 512 bytes.
Introduction of specialized kmem cache allows to reduce the size from 512 to 408 bytes. Additionally, since override and raw params in dirty records are mutually exclusive, puting them into a union allows to reduce structure size down to 368 bytes, increasing the saving to 28%, that can be a 0.5GB or more of RAM.
How Has This Been Tested?
Types of changes
Checklist:
Signed-off-by.