Re: reiser fs slow on mksf and mount

[Ming Zhang <mingz@ele.uri.edu>]

forget to mention that original mount is immediately after mkfs. so no
files in fs at all.

now i create 1048576 4KB files

then umount and remount

[root@bakstor2u root]# time mount /dev/md0 t

real    1m10.971s
user    0m0.001s
sys     0m0.188s

almost same as first one.

this is from dmesg

ReiserFS: md0: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal
ReiserFS: md0: using ordered data mode
ReiserFS: md0: journal params: device md0, size 8192, journal first
block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max
trans age 30
ReiserFS: md0: checking transaction log (md0)
ReiserFS: md0: Using r5 hash to sort names


so i could not understand why mount a fs with 0 files is same time with
mount a fs with 1M files.

Thanks!

Ming



On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 13:08 -0400, Ming Zhang wrote:
> i think 3.2TB partition is not that big these days right?
> 
> i would think some people that hold millions of files will have much
> larger partition than this.
> 
> so you think this is a normal speed for such size partition?
> 
> also iostat 1 -k shows that during mount, there are small size read
> happen each second. so this is because read meta data and metadata is
> not continuous on disk?
> 
> ming
> 
> 
> On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 21:04 +0400, Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote:
> > Hello
> > 
> > Ming Zhang wrote:
> > > Hi, folks
> > > 
> > > I am not sure if this is normal or not.
> > > 
> > > I try to create&use a reiserfs on a 8 disk raid0. Then I found that mkfs
> > > need ~90 sec and mount need ~70 seconds. 
> > > 
> > > Is there anything wrong on my side?
> > > 
> > 
> > Your device is too big.
> > 
> > > Thanks!
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Ming
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Detailed info followed.
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > [root@bakstor2u root]# cat /proc/mdstat
> > > Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid5] [multipath] [raid6]
> > > [raid10] [faulty]
> > > md0 : active raid0 sda[0] sdh[7] sdg[6] sdf[5] sde[4] sdd[3] sdc[2] sdb
> > > [1]
> > >       3125690368 blocks 64k chunks
> > > 
> > > unused devices: <none>
> > > 
> > > [root@bakstor2u root]# time mkfs.reiserfs /dev/md0 -ff
> > > mkfs.reiserfs 3.6.13 (2003 www.namesys.com)
> > > 
> > > <...>
> > > 
> > > Guessing about desired format.. Kernel 2.6.11.12 is running.
> > > Format 3.6 with standard journal
> > > Count of blocks on the device: 781422592
> > > Number of blocks consumed by mkreiserfs formatting process: 32059
> > > Blocksize: 4096
> > > Hash function used to sort names: "r5"
> > > Journal Size 8193 blocks (first block 18)
> > > Journal Max transaction length 1024
> > > inode generation number: 0
> > > UUID: 98d990f3-d54f-43e3-9fde-8c9c9a6d3481
> > > Initializing journal - 0%....20%....40%....60%....80%....100%
> > > Syncing..ok
> > > 
> > > Tell your friends to use a kernel based on 2.4.18 or later, and
> > > especially not a
> > > kernel based on 2.4.9, when you use reiserFS. Have fun.
> > > 
> > > ReiserFS is successfully created on /dev/md0.
> > > 
> > > real    1m28.783s
> > > user    0m0.151s
> > > sys     0m0.398s
> > > 
> > 
> > Hmm, mkfs.reiserfs had to write 32059 blocks. It is about 131mb. 1m28s is too much for that.
> > Could it be that some of disks used in that raid were not spinning when you started mkreiserfs?
> > 
> > > [root@bakstor2u root]# time mount /dev/md0  t
> > > 
> > > real    1m11.448s
> > > user    0m0.000s
> > > sys     0m0.225s
> > > 
> > 
> > There is a patch to cure this problem.
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/reiserfs-list@namesys.com/msg18442.html
> > Please note that it is experimental one.
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
>