Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PerfCounter: Add osd op thread latency counter #5793

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 26, 2015

Conversation

yuyuyu101
Copy link
Member

Currently we have "l_osd_op_lat" counting from message receive to reply message, "l_osd_op_process_lat" counting from dequeue message to reply message. These two counter could behavior well to find the osd queue time consuming.

But we also need to make sure the detail time consuming in "l_osd_op_process_lat", like how much time consumed for prepare transaction and queue it, and how much time consumed for getting transaction committed.

This change add time counter for osd thread prepare transaction.

| receiving message | osd queue | prepare transaction | queue_transaction | wait committed |
<-------------------------------------------------------------l_osd_op_lat ---------------------------------------->
------------------------------------------<--------------------------l_osd_op_process_la---------------------->
------------------------------------------<---------l_osd_op_prepare_lat---------------->

Signed-off-by: Haomai Wang <haomaiwang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Haomai Wang <haomaiwang@gmail.com>
We don't need l_os_queue_lat to only count the latency of op throttle, this
could be done by Throttle counter itself. We may concern the latency consumed
by FileJournal submit time.

Signed-off-by: Haomai Wang <haomaiwang@gmail.com>
liewegas added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 26, 2015
osd: add osd op queue latency perfcounter

Reviewed-by: Sage Weil <sage@redhat.com>
@liewegas liewegas merged commit b7eb167 into ceph:master Nov 26, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants