From: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
To: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/7] XFS: dynamic busy extent tracking
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:11:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200810100911.19345.Martin@lichtvoll.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081009223328.GI9597@disturbed>
Am Freitag 10 Oktober 2008 schrieben Sie:
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 08:17:32PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
[...]
> > A student in the Linux Performance Tuning course I hold this week
> > compared this with ext3, even with the improved mkfs.xfs options (but
> > without lazy-count=1, cause mkfs.xfs from Debian Etch is too old) and
> > even with noop as IO scheduler. AFAIR XFS took roughly 3-4 times as
> > long as Ext3, I did not note the exact numbers. This was with 2.6.25.
> > I can repeat the test locally with 2.6.26.5 if wanted.
>
> Yes, that's par for the course. XFS journals transactions almost
> immediately, whereas ext3 gathers lots of changees in memory and
> checkpoints infrequently. Hence XFS writes a lot more to the
> journal and is hence slower. The dynamic extent tracking is a
> necessary step to moving the XFS journalling to a more
> checkpoint-like setup which would perform much less journal
> I/O and hence run substantially faster....
>
> See the asynchronous transaction aggregation section here:
>
> http://xfs.org/index.php/Improving_Metadata_Performance_By_Reducing_Jou
>rnal_Overhead
Thanks for the info Dave.
I still have your three mails about future improvements on XFS on my
reading list. I just read a bit of the first one.
Ciao,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-10 7:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-07 22:09 [RFC, PATCH 0/7] XFS: dynamic busy extent tracking Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 1/7] XFS: rename xfs_get_perag Dave Chinner
2008-10-08 18:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 2/7] XFS: replace fixed size busy extent array with an rbtree Dave Chinner
2008-10-08 18:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-10-09 0:06 ` Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 3/7] XFS: Don't immediately reallocate busy extents Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 4/7] XFS: Don't use log forces when busy extents are allocated Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 5/7] XFS: Do not classify freed allocation btree blocks as busy Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 6/7] XFS: Avoid busy extent ranges rather than the entire extent Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 7/7] XFS: Simplify transaction busy extent tracking Dave Chinner
2008-10-09 18:17 ` [RFC, PATCH 0/7] XFS: dynamic " Martin Steigerwald
2008-10-09 22:33 ` Dave Chinner
2008-10-10 7:11 ` Martin Steigerwald [this message]
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=200810100911.19345.Martin@lichtvoll.de \
--to=martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-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.