Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 02:33:09PM -0800, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Saturday 15 March 2008 14:54, Willy Tarreau wrote:
I think it could get major adoption with ordered writes.

It already has ordered write when it is in flush mode.

but IIRC it works in write-through then.

OK, I hear you. There will be an ordered write mode that uses barriers
to decide the ordering. It will greatly reduce the speed at which
ramback can flush dirty data because of the need to wait synchronously
on every barrier, of which there are many. And thus will widen out the
window during which UPS power must remain available if power goes out,
in order to get all acknowledged transactions on to stable media. The
advantage is, the stable media always has a point-in-time version of
the filesystem.

Don't expect this mode in the immediate future though, there are bugs
to fix in the current driver, which already implements the required
performance and stability requirements for a broad range of users.

ah, good!

That is why I keep recommending that a ramback setup be replicated or
mirrored, which people in this thread keep glossing over. When
replicated or mirrored, you still get the microsecond-level transaction
times, and you get the safety too.

I agree, but in this case, you should present it this way. You have been
insisting too much on the average PC's reliability, the fact that no kernel
ever crashed for you, etc... So you are demonstrating that your product is
good provided that everything goes perfectly. All people who have experienced
software or hardware problems in the past (ie mostly everyone here) will not
trust your code because it relies on pre-requisites they know they do not
have.

That would have been a miscommunication then. I see arguments coming
in that suggest embedded solutions, EMC for example, are inherently more
reliable than a Linux based solution. Well guess what? Some of those
embedded solutions already use Linux.

But their RAM does not depend on a lot of factors to remain valid and
usable, which is the problem with the common PC.

Also, peecees are much more reliable than people give them credit for,
especially if you harden up the obvious points of failure such as fans
and spinning disks.

and PSU.

Once you have your system all hardened up, then
you _still_ better replicate your important data. Perhaps I should not
admit this, but I simply fail to do that on the machine from which I am
posting right now, which also runs my web server and mail system. That
is because I would have to reboot it to install ddsnap so I can replicate
properly, and because the thing is so darn reliable that I just have
not gotten around to it. I do copy off the important files from time
to time though, and do various other things to ameliorate the risk. If
it was enterprise data I would obviously do a lot more.

Securing every component simply reduces the risk of a loss of service.
What is important with data is to know the consequences of loss of service.
If that only means that no one can work and that the last second of work is
lost, it's generally acceptable. If it means everything is lost to a corrupted
FS, obviously it's not.

There will be a whole bunch of patches from me that are SSD oriented,
over time. The fact is, enterprise scale ramdisks are here now, while
enterprise scale flash is not. Getting close, but not here. And flash
does not approach the write performance of RAM, not now and probably
not ever.

My goal is not to replace RAM with flash, but disk with flash.

My immediate goal is to replace disk with RAM.

No, you're replacing disk activity with RAM activity. But you keep disk as
a backend, long-term storage.

You are
against ordered writes for a performance reason. Use SSD instead of
hard drives and it will be as fast as sequential writes. Also, when
you say that enterprise scale flash is not there, I don't agree. You
can already afford hundreds of gigs of flash in 3,5" form factor. An
1.6 TB SSD has even been presented at CES2008, with sales announced
for Q3. So clearly this will replace your hard drives soon, very soon.
Even if it costs $5k, that's a very acceptable solution to replace a
disk in a RAM-speed appliance.

Exactly what I mean: close but not there. Those gigantic RAM boxes are
shipping now, and the same company has got a 5 TB flash box coming down
the pipe, and sooner than Q3. But the RAM box will always outperform
the flash box. You just keep throwing writes at it until all available
flash is in erase mode, and the thing slows down. If that is not a
problem for you, then great, you can also save a lot of money by going
with flash. But if nothing less than the ultimate in performance will
do, RAM is the only way to go.

Sorry if I was not clear. I was not speaking about replacing the RAM with
flash, but only the disks. You keep the RAM for the speed, and use flash
for permanent storage instead of disks. No seek time, average RW speed now
slightly better than disks, that combined with your ramdisk and ordered
write-backs writes will have the best of both worlds : RAM speed and flash
reliability.

Willy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Whither "Hybrid" Disk Drives?
    ... well, never, unless its dirty contents overflows the area alloted for it (and the kinds of things that tend to be saved to disk on a laptop tend to be smallish, so that shouldn't happen often). ... with laptop RAM complements rapidly approaching 1 GB theses days: typical use should result in declining disk-read rates over time as less and less cannot be found in the system RAM. ... So how long does that take to fill a, say 128MB flash buffer? ... If you were indeed referring to destaging from flash to the platters that may make your current response more understandable, but then I'm not sure what the purpose of your earlier response was. ...
    (comp.arch)
  • Re: Computers of the Future
    ... AI to decide how to allocate CPU, RAM, DISK, Flash etc in a way the ... AI to place files on disk in the most optimal way. ... No more locking apps or data into a particular machine. ...
    (comp.lang.java.advocacy)
  • Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet
    ... What I mean is that in a PC, RAM contents are very fragile: ... So please don't underestimate the reliability of a PC. ... I never spoke about waiting for disk transactions. ... You keep the RAM for the speed, and use flash ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet
    ... The fact is, enterprise scale ramdisks are here now, while ... enterprise scale flash is not. ... My goal is not to replace RAM with flash, but disk with flash. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: virtual memory
    ... advantages of flash over a disk are very fast random R/W. ... those pages in RAM in the first place. ... Fast external NV storage (aka SSDs - solid-state-disk) does have some ...
    (comp.arch)