zfs/module/zfs/vdev_mirror.c

558 lines
14 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
/*
* CDDL HEADER START
*
* The contents of this file are subject to the terms of the
* Common Development and Distribution License (the "License").
* You may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
*
* You can obtain a copy of the license at usr/src/OPENSOLARIS.LICENSE
* or http://www.opensolaris.org/os/licensing.
* See the License for the specific language governing permissions
* and limitations under the License.
*
* When distributing Covered Code, include this CDDL HEADER in each
* file and include the License file at usr/src/OPENSOLARIS.LICENSE.
* If applicable, add the following below this CDDL HEADER, with the
* fields enclosed by brackets "[]" replaced with your own identifying
* information: Portions Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
*
* CDDL HEADER END
*/
/*
* Copyright 2010 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved.
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
* Use is subject to license terms.
*/
/*
* Copyright (c) 2013 by Delphix. All rights reserved.
*/
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
#include <sys/zfs_context.h>
#include <sys/spa.h>
#include <sys/vdev_impl.h>
#include <sys/zio.h>
#include <sys/fs/zfs.h>
/*
* Virtual device vector for mirroring.
*/
typedef struct mirror_child {
vdev_t *mc_vd;
uint64_t mc_offset;
int mc_error;
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
int mc_pending;
uint8_t mc_tried;
uint8_t mc_skipped;
uint8_t mc_speculative;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
} mirror_child_t;
typedef struct mirror_map {
int mm_children;
int mm_replacing;
int mm_preferred;
int mm_root;
mirror_child_t mm_child[1];
} mirror_map_t;
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
/*
* When the children are equally busy queue incoming requests to a single
* child for N microseconds. This is done to maximize the likelihood that
* the Linux elevator will be able to merge requests while it is plugged.
* Otherwise, requests are queued to the least busy device.
*
* For rotational disks the Linux elevator will plug for 10ms which is
* why zfs_vdev_mirror_switch_us is set to 10ms by default. For non-
* rotational disks the elevator will not plug, but 10ms is still a small
* enough value that the requests will get spread over all the children.
*
* For fast SSDs it may make sense to decrease zfs_vdev_mirror_switch_us
* significantly to bound the worst case latencies. It would probably be
* ideal to calculate a decaying average of the last observed latencies and
* use that to dynamically adjust the zfs_vdev_mirror_switch_us time.
*/
int zfs_vdev_mirror_switch_us = 10000;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
static void
vdev_mirror_map_free(zio_t *zio)
{
mirror_map_t *mm = zio->io_vsd;
kmem_free(mm, offsetof(mirror_map_t, mm_child[mm->mm_children]));
}
static const zio_vsd_ops_t vdev_mirror_vsd_ops = {
vdev_mirror_map_free,
zio_vsd_default_cksum_report
};
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
static int
vdev_mirror_pending(vdev_t *vd)
{
return avl_numnodes(&vd->vdev_queue.vq_pending_tree);
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
}
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
static mirror_map_t *
vdev_mirror_map_alloc(zio_t *zio)
{
mirror_map_t *mm = NULL;
mirror_child_t *mc;
vdev_t *vd = zio->io_vd;
int c, d;
if (vd == NULL) {
dva_t *dva = zio->io_bp->blk_dva;
spa_t *spa = zio->io_spa;
c = BP_GET_NDVAS(zio->io_bp);
mm = kmem_zalloc(offsetof(mirror_map_t, mm_child[c]), KM_PUSHPAGE);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
mm->mm_children = c;
mm->mm_replacing = B_FALSE;
mm->mm_preferred = spa_get_random(c);
mm->mm_root = B_TRUE;
/*
* Check the other, lower-index DVAs to see if they're on
* the same vdev as the child we picked. If they are, use
* them since they are likely to have been allocated from
* the primary metaslab in use at the time, and hence are
* more likely to have locality with single-copy data.
*/
for (c = mm->mm_preferred, d = c - 1; d >= 0; d--) {
if (DVA_GET_VDEV(&dva[d]) == DVA_GET_VDEV(&dva[c]))
mm->mm_preferred = d;
}
for (c = 0; c < mm->mm_children; c++) {
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
mc->mc_vd = vdev_lookup_top(spa, DVA_GET_VDEV(&dva[c]));
mc->mc_offset = DVA_GET_OFFSET(&dva[c]);
}
} else {
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
int lowest_pending = INT_MAX;
int lowest_nr = 1;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
c = vd->vdev_children;
mm = kmem_zalloc(offsetof(mirror_map_t, mm_child[c]), KM_PUSHPAGE);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
mm->mm_children = c;
mm->mm_replacing = (vd->vdev_ops == &vdev_replacing_ops ||
vd->vdev_ops == &vdev_spare_ops);
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
mm->mm_preferred = 0;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
mm->mm_root = B_FALSE;
for (c = 0; c < mm->mm_children; c++) {
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
mc->mc_vd = vd->vdev_child[c];
mc->mc_offset = zio->io_offset;
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
if (mm->mm_replacing)
continue;
if (!vdev_readable(mc->mc_vd)) {
mc->mc_error = SET_ERROR(ENXIO);
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
mc->mc_tried = 1;
mc->mc_skipped = 1;
mc->mc_pending = INT_MAX;
continue;
}
mc->mc_pending = vdev_mirror_pending(mc->mc_vd);
if (mc->mc_pending < lowest_pending) {
lowest_pending = mc->mc_pending;
lowest_nr = 1;
} else if (mc->mc_pending == lowest_pending) {
lowest_nr++;
}
}
d = gethrtime() / (NSEC_PER_USEC * zfs_vdev_mirror_switch_us);
d = (d % lowest_nr) + 1;
for (c = 0; c < mm->mm_children; c++) {
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
if (mm->mm_child[c].mc_pending == lowest_pending) {
if (--d == 0) {
mm->mm_preferred = c;
break;
}
}
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
}
zio->io_vsd = mm;
zio->io_vsd_ops = &vdev_mirror_vsd_ops;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
return (mm);
}
static int
vdev_mirror_open(vdev_t *vd, uint64_t *asize, uint64_t *max_asize,
uint64_t *ashift)
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
{
int numerrors = 0;
2009-08-18 18:43:27 +00:00
int lasterror = 0;
int c;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
if (vd->vdev_children == 0) {
vd->vdev_stat.vs_aux = VDEV_AUX_BAD_LABEL;
return (SET_ERROR(EINVAL));
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
2009-08-18 18:43:27 +00:00
vdev_open_children(vd);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
for (c = 0; c < vd->vdev_children; c++) {
2009-08-18 18:43:27 +00:00
vdev_t *cvd = vd->vdev_child[c];
if (cvd->vdev_open_error) {
lasterror = cvd->vdev_open_error;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
numerrors++;
continue;
}
*asize = MIN(*asize - 1, cvd->vdev_asize - 1) + 1;
*max_asize = MIN(*max_asize - 1, cvd->vdev_max_asize - 1) + 1;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
*ashift = MAX(*ashift, cvd->vdev_ashift);
}
if (numerrors == vd->vdev_children) {
vd->vdev_stat.vs_aux = VDEV_AUX_NO_REPLICAS;
return (lasterror);
}
return (0);
}
static void
vdev_mirror_close(vdev_t *vd)
{
int c;
for (c = 0; c < vd->vdev_children; c++)
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
vdev_close(vd->vdev_child[c]);
}
static void
vdev_mirror_child_done(zio_t *zio)
{
mirror_child_t *mc = zio->io_private;
mc->mc_error = zio->io_error;
mc->mc_tried = 1;
mc->mc_skipped = 0;
}
static void
vdev_mirror_scrub_done(zio_t *zio)
{
mirror_child_t *mc = zio->io_private;
if (zio->io_error == 0) {
2009-02-18 20:51:31 +00:00
zio_t *pio;
mutex_enter(&zio->io_lock);
while ((pio = zio_walk_parents(zio)) != NULL) {
mutex_enter(&pio->io_lock);
ASSERT3U(zio->io_size, >=, pio->io_size);
bcopy(zio->io_data, pio->io_data, pio->io_size);
mutex_exit(&pio->io_lock);
}
mutex_exit(&zio->io_lock);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
zio_buf_free(zio->io_data, zio->io_size);
mc->mc_error = zio->io_error;
mc->mc_tried = 1;
mc->mc_skipped = 0;
}
/*
* Try to find a child whose DTL doesn't contain the block we want to read.
* If we can't, try the read on any vdev we haven't already tried.
*/
static int
vdev_mirror_child_select(zio_t *zio)
{
mirror_map_t *mm = zio->io_vsd;
mirror_child_t *mc;
uint64_t txg = zio->io_txg;
int i, c;
ASSERT(zio->io_bp == NULL || BP_PHYSICAL_BIRTH(zio->io_bp) == txg);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
/*
* Try to find a child whose DTL doesn't contain the block to read.
* If a child is known to be completely inaccessible (indicated by
* vdev_readable() returning B_FALSE), don't even try.
*/
for (i = 0, c = mm->mm_preferred; i < mm->mm_children; i++, c++) {
if (c >= mm->mm_children)
c = 0;
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
if (mc->mc_tried || mc->mc_skipped)
continue;
if (!vdev_readable(mc->mc_vd)) {
mc->mc_error = SET_ERROR(ENXIO);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
mc->mc_tried = 1; /* don't even try */
mc->mc_skipped = 1;
continue;
}
2009-01-15 21:59:39 +00:00
if (!vdev_dtl_contains(mc->mc_vd, DTL_MISSING, txg, 1))
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
return (c);
mc->mc_error = SET_ERROR(ESTALE);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
mc->mc_skipped = 1;
mc->mc_speculative = 1;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
/*
* Every device is either missing or has this txg in its DTL.
* Look for any child we haven't already tried before giving up.
*/
for (c = 0; c < mm->mm_children; c++)
if (!mm->mm_child[c].mc_tried)
return (c);
/*
* Every child failed. There's no place left to look.
*/
return (-1);
}
static int
vdev_mirror_io_start(zio_t *zio)
{
mirror_map_t *mm;
mirror_child_t *mc;
int c, children;
mm = vdev_mirror_map_alloc(zio);
if (zio->io_type == ZIO_TYPE_READ) {
if ((zio->io_flags & ZIO_FLAG_SCRUB) && !mm->mm_replacing) {
/*
* For scrubbing reads we need to allocate a read
* buffer for each child and issue reads to all
* children. If any child succeeds, it will copy its
* data into zio->io_data in vdev_mirror_scrub_done.
*/
for (c = 0; c < mm->mm_children; c++) {
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
zio_nowait(zio_vdev_child_io(zio, zio->io_bp,
mc->mc_vd, mc->mc_offset,
zio_buf_alloc(zio->io_size), zio->io_size,
zio->io_type, zio->io_priority, 0,
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
vdev_mirror_scrub_done, mc));
}
return (ZIO_PIPELINE_CONTINUE);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
/*
* For normal reads just pick one child.
*/
c = vdev_mirror_child_select(zio);
children = (c >= 0);
} else {
ASSERT(zio->io_type == ZIO_TYPE_WRITE);
/*
2009-01-15 21:59:39 +00:00
* Writes go to all children.
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
*/
2009-01-15 21:59:39 +00:00
c = 0;
children = mm->mm_children;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
while (children--) {
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
zio_nowait(zio_vdev_child_io(zio, zio->io_bp,
mc->mc_vd, mc->mc_offset, zio->io_data, zio->io_size,
zio->io_type, zio->io_priority, 0,
vdev_mirror_child_done, mc));
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
c++;
}
return (ZIO_PIPELINE_CONTINUE);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
static int
vdev_mirror_worst_error(mirror_map_t *mm)
{
int c, error[2] = { 0, 0 };
for (c = 0; c < mm->mm_children; c++) {
mirror_child_t *mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
int s = mc->mc_speculative;
error[s] = zio_worst_error(error[s], mc->mc_error);
}
return (error[0] ? error[0] : error[1]);
}
static void
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
vdev_mirror_io_done(zio_t *zio)
{
mirror_map_t *mm = zio->io_vsd;
mirror_child_t *mc;
int c;
int good_copies = 0;
int unexpected_errors = 0;
for (c = 0; c < mm->mm_children; c++) {
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
if (mc->mc_error) {
if (!mc->mc_skipped)
unexpected_errors++;
} else if (mc->mc_tried) {
good_copies++;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
}
if (zio->io_type == ZIO_TYPE_WRITE) {
/*
* XXX -- for now, treat partial writes as success.
*
* Now that we support write reallocation, it would be better
* to treat partial failure as real failure unless there are
* no non-degraded top-level vdevs left, and not update DTLs
* if we intend to reallocate.
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
*/
/* XXPOLICY */
if (good_copies != mm->mm_children) {
/*
* Always require at least one good copy.
*
* For ditto blocks (io_vd == NULL), require
* all copies to be good.
*
* XXX -- for replacing vdevs, there's no great answer.
* If the old device is really dead, we may not even
* be able to access it -- so we only want to
* require good writes to the new device. But if
* the new device turns out to be flaky, we want
* to be able to detach it -- which requires all
* writes to the old device to have succeeded.
*/
if (good_copies == 0 || zio->io_vd == NULL)
zio->io_error = vdev_mirror_worst_error(mm);
}
return;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
ASSERT(zio->io_type == ZIO_TYPE_READ);
/*
* If we don't have a good copy yet, keep trying other children.
*/
/* XXPOLICY */
if (good_copies == 0 && (c = vdev_mirror_child_select(zio)) != -1) {
ASSERT(c >= 0 && c < mm->mm_children);
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
zio_vdev_io_redone(zio);
zio_nowait(zio_vdev_child_io(zio, zio->io_bp,
mc->mc_vd, mc->mc_offset, zio->io_data, zio->io_size,
ZIO_TYPE_READ, zio->io_priority, 0,
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
vdev_mirror_child_done, mc));
return;
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
/* XXPOLICY */
if (good_copies == 0) {
zio->io_error = vdev_mirror_worst_error(mm);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
ASSERT(zio->io_error != 0);
}
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
2009-01-15 21:59:39 +00:00
if (good_copies && spa_writeable(zio->io_spa) &&
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
(unexpected_errors ||
(zio->io_flags & ZIO_FLAG_RESILVER) ||
((zio->io_flags & ZIO_FLAG_SCRUB) && mm->mm_replacing))) {
/*
* Use the good data we have in hand to repair damaged children.
*/
for (c = 0; c < mm->mm_children; c++) {
/*
* Don't rewrite known good children.
* Not only is it unnecessary, it could
* actually be harmful: if the system lost
* power while rewriting the only good copy,
* there would be no good copies left!
*/
mc = &mm->mm_child[c];
if (mc->mc_error == 0) {
if (mc->mc_tried)
continue;
if (!(zio->io_flags & ZIO_FLAG_SCRUB) &&
2009-01-15 21:59:39 +00:00
!vdev_dtl_contains(mc->mc_vd, DTL_PARTIAL,
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
zio->io_txg, 1))
continue;
mc->mc_error = SET_ERROR(ESTALE);
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
zio_nowait(zio_vdev_child_io(zio, zio->io_bp,
mc->mc_vd, mc->mc_offset,
zio->io_data, zio->io_size,
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
ZIO_TYPE_WRITE, zio->io_priority,
2009-01-15 21:59:39 +00:00
ZIO_FLAG_IO_REPAIR | (unexpected_errors ?
ZIO_FLAG_SELF_HEAL : 0), NULL, NULL));
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
}
}
}
static void
vdev_mirror_state_change(vdev_t *vd, int faulted, int degraded)
{
if (faulted == vd->vdev_children)
vdev_set_state(vd, B_FALSE, VDEV_STATE_CANT_OPEN,
VDEV_AUX_NO_REPLICAS);
else if (degraded + faulted != 0)
vdev_set_state(vd, B_FALSE, VDEV_STATE_DEGRADED, VDEV_AUX_NONE);
else
vdev_set_state(vd, B_FALSE, VDEV_STATE_HEALTHY, VDEV_AUX_NONE);
}
vdev_ops_t vdev_mirror_ops = {
vdev_mirror_open,
vdev_mirror_close,
vdev_default_asize,
vdev_mirror_io_start,
vdev_mirror_io_done,
vdev_mirror_state_change,
NULL,
NULL,
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
VDEV_TYPE_MIRROR, /* name of this vdev type */
B_FALSE /* not a leaf vdev */
};
vdev_ops_t vdev_replacing_ops = {
vdev_mirror_open,
vdev_mirror_close,
vdev_default_asize,
vdev_mirror_io_start,
vdev_mirror_io_done,
vdev_mirror_state_change,
NULL,
NULL,
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
VDEV_TYPE_REPLACING, /* name of this vdev type */
B_FALSE /* not a leaf vdev */
};
vdev_ops_t vdev_spare_ops = {
vdev_mirror_open,
vdev_mirror_close,
vdev_default_asize,
vdev_mirror_io_start,
vdev_mirror_io_done,
vdev_mirror_state_change,
NULL,
NULL,
2008-11-20 20:01:55 +00:00
VDEV_TYPE_SPARE, /* name of this vdev type */
B_FALSE /* not a leaf vdev */
};
Improve N-way mirror performance The read bandwidth of an N-way mirror can by increased by 50%, and the IOPs by 10%, by more carefully selecting the preferred leaf vdev. The existing algorthm selects a perferred leaf vdev based on offset of the zio request modulo the number of members in the mirror. It assumes the drives are of equal performance and that spreading the requests randomly over both drives will be sufficient to saturate them. In practice this results in the leaf vdevs being under utilized. Utilization can be improved by preferentially selecting the leaf vdev with the least pending IO. This prevents leaf vdevs from being starved and compensates for performance differences between disks in the mirror. Faster vdevs will be sent more work and the mirror performance will not be limitted by the slowest drive. In the common case where all the pending queues are full and there is no single least busy leaf vdev a batching stratagy is employed. Of the N least busy vdevs one is selected with equal probability to be the preferred vdev for T microseconds. Compared to randomly selecting a vdev to break the tie batching the requests greatly improves the odds of merging the requests in the Linux elevator. The testing results show a significant performance improvement for all four workloads tested. The workloads were generated using the fio benchmark and are as follows. 1) 1MB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 2) 4KB sequential reads from 16 threads to 16 files (MB/s). 3) 1MB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). 4) 4KB random reads from 16 threads to 16 files (IOP/s). | Pristine | With 1461 | | Sequential Random | Sequential Random | | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | 1MB 4KB 1MB 4KB | | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | MB/s MB/s IO/s IO/s | ---------------+-----------------------+------------------------+ 2 Striped | 226 243 11 304 | 222 255 11 299 | 2 2-Way Mirror | 302 324 16 534 | 433 448 23 571 | 2 3-Way Mirror | 429 458 24 714 | 648 648 41 808 | 2 4-Way Mirror | 562 601 36 849 | 816 828 82 926 | Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1461
2013-05-31 19:07:59 +00:00
#if defined(_KERNEL) && defined(HAVE_SPL)
module_param(zfs_vdev_mirror_switch_us, int, 0644);
MODULE_PARM_DESC(zfs_vdev_mirror_switch_us, "Switch mirrors every N usecs");
#endif