From: "Daniele P." <daniele@interline.it>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfsdump -s unacceptable performances
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:01:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200608162001.10342.daniele@interline.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44E32DE6.9090602@gmx.net>
On Wednesday 16 August 2006 16:38, you wrote:
> Daniele P. schrieb:
> Hi Daniele,
>
> hum, so the 2.2.27 was running 3657m39.120s and the 2.2.38 is running
> the same (?) in 0m17.575s. Where is your performance problem running now
> 10000 times faster than the old 2.2.27 version???
> Or did i miss something?
Hi Klaus,
Yes, there was a huge performance improvement for /small/ filesystem,
(40.000 inodes, in my test case).
But xfsdump still doesn't scale down well with a small subtree on a
large filesystem.
Now the test on the /large/ (11.000.000 inodes) filesystem has ended.
ori:~# find /media/xfs-large/backup/pin/ -type f | wc -l
2
ori:~# find /media/xfs-large/backup/pin/ -type d | wc -l
2
ori:~# find /media/xfs-large/backup/pin/ | wc -l
4
ori:~# du -s /media/xfs-large/backup/pin/
8 /media/xfs-large/backup/pin/
I stopped the test with 2.2.27 after 5 days of "phase 3".
Here is the test with 2.2.38, which is still too slow:
time /usr/local/bin/xfsdump -p 60 -v drive=debug,media=debug \
-s backup/pin - /media/xfs-large | dd of=/dev/null
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: using file dump (drive_simple) strategy
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: version 2.2.38 (dump format 3.0) - Running
single-threaded
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: level 0 dump of ori:/media/xfs-large
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: dump date: Wed Aug 16 12:56:57 2006
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: session id: a293b79a-a5ac-4e49-be3e-55fbc5f8fba2
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: session label: ""
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: ino map phase 1: constructing initial dump list
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: status at 12:58:12: 75 seconds elapsed
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: ino map phase 2: skipping (no pruning necessary)
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: ino map phase 3: skipping (only one dump stream)
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: status at 12:58:57: inomap phase 3 79568/11017767 inos
scanned, 120 seconds elaps
ed
[...]
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: status at 13:10:58: inomap phase 3 1890564/11017767
inos scanned, 841 seconds elapsed
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: ino map construction complete
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: estimated dump size: 5617536 bytes
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: Media op: begin media file
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: creating dump session media file 0 (media 0, file 0)
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: dumping ino map
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: flushing write buf addr 0xb7e58000 size 0x40000
[...]
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: flushing write buf addr 0xb7e58000 size 0x40000
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: dumping directories
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: dumping non-directory files
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: status at 13:44:48: 1/2 files dumped, 31.6% data
dumped, 2871 seconds elapsed
[...]
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: status at 14:02:57: 2/2 files dumped, 44.5% data
dumped, 3960 seconds elapsed
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: ending media file
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: Media op: end media file
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: flushing write buf addr 0xb7e58000 size 0x1a6b8
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: media file size 5613240 bytes
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: dump size (non-dir files) : 3648 bytes
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: dump complete: 3999 seconds elapsed
/usr/local/bin/xfsdump: Dump Status: SUCCESS
10963+1 records in
10963+1 records out
5613240 bytes transferred in 3998.904421 seconds (1404 bytes/sec)
real 66m38.933s
user 0m2.882s
sys 0m36.289s
Regards,
Daniele
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-16 19:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-16 13:15 xfsdump -s unacceptable performances Daniele P.
2006-08-16 14:38 ` Klaus Strebel
2006-08-16 18:01 ` Daniele P. [this message]
2006-08-17 1:31 ` Timothy Shimmin
2006-08-17 6:58 ` Daniele P.
2006-08-17 12:29 ` Peter Grandi
2006-08-16 16:38 ` Bill Kendall
2006-08-16 18:05 ` Daniele P.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200608162001.10342.daniele@interline.it \
--to=daniele@interline.it \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.