From: Stephane Chazelas <stephane_chazelas@yahoo.fr>
To: helmut@hullen.de
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: btrfs balancing start - and stop?
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 20:07:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110404190753.GC9371@yahoo.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Bj8nJL4D1uB@helmut.hullen.de>
2011-04-03 21:35:00 +0200, Helmut Hullen:
> Hallo, Stephane,
>
> Du meintest am 03.04.11:
>
> >>>> balancing about 2 TByte needed about 20 hours.
>
> [...]
>
> >> Hugo has explained the limits of regarding
> >>
> >> dmesg | grep relocating
> >>
> >> or (more simple) the last lines of "dmesg" and looking for the
> >> "relocating" lines. But: what do these lines tell now? What is the
> >> (pessimistic) estimation when you extrapolate the data?
>
> [...]
>
> > 4.7 more days to go. And I reckon it will have written about 9
> > TB to disk by that time (which is the total size of the volume,
> > though only 3.8TB are occupied).
>
> Yes - that's the pessimistic estimation. As Hugo has explained it can
> finish faster - just look to the data tomorrow again.
[...]
That may be an optimistic estimation actually, as there hasn't
been much progress in the last 34 hours:
# dmesg | awk -F '[][ ]+' '/reloc/ &&n++%5==0 {x=(n-$7)/($2-t)/1048576; printf "%s\t%s\t%.2f\t%*s\n", $2/3600,$7, x, x/3, ""; t=$2; n=$7}' | tr ' ' '*' | tail -40
125.629 4170039951360 11.93 ***
125.641 4166818725888 70.99 ***********************
125.699 4157155049472 43.87 **************
125.753 4144270147584 63.34 *********************
125.773 4137827696640 84.98 ****************************
125.786 4134606471168 64.39 *********************
125.823 4124942794752 70.09 ***********************
125.87 4112057892864 71.66 ***********************
125.887 4105615441920 100.60 *********************************
125.898 4102394216448 81.26 ***************************
125.935 4092730540032 69.06 ***********************
126.33 4085751218176 4.69 *
131.904 4072597880832 0.63
132.082 4059712978944 19.20 ******
132.12 4053270528000 45.52 ***************
132.138 4050049302528 45.60 ***************
132.225 4040385626112 29.68 *********
132.267 4027500724224 81.17 ***************************
132.283 4021058273280 106.31 ***********************************
132.29 4017837047808 110.42 ************************************
132.316 4008173371392 100.54 *********************************
132.358 3995288469504 81.18 ***************************
132.475 3988846018560 14.62 ****
132.514 3985624793088 21.55 *******
132.611 3975961116672 26.40 ********
132.663 3963076214784 65.31 *********************
132.678 3956633763840 120.11 ****************************************
132.685 3956365328384 10.26 ***
137.701 3949922877440 0.34
137.709 3946701651968 106.54 ***********************************
137.744 3937037975552 72.10 ************************
137.889 3927105863680 18.18 ******
137.901 3926837428224 5.85 *
141.555 3926300557312 0.04
141.93 3925226815488 0.76
151.227 3924421509120 0.02
151.491 3924153073664 0.27
151.712 3923616202752 0.64
165.301 3922542460928 0.02
174.346 3921737154560 0.02
At this rate (third field expressed in MiB/s), it could take
months to complete.
iostat still reports writes at about 5MiB/s though. Note that
this system is not doing anything else at all.
There definitely seems to be scope for optimisation in the
"balancing" I'd say.
--
Stephane
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-04 19:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-01 11:14 btrfs balancing start - and stop? Struan Bartlett
2011-04-01 11:59 ` Hugo Mills
2011-04-05 16:06 ` Struan Bartlett
2011-04-01 12:12 ` Helmut Hullen
2011-04-01 13:22 ` Konstantinos Skarlatos
2011-04-01 13:36 ` Helmut Hullen
2011-04-01 13:52 ` Hugo Mills
[not found] ` <20110401133736.GB2984@carfax.org.uk>
2011-04-01 14:24 ` Konstantinos Skarlatos
2011-04-01 18:33 ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-04-01 19:26 ` Helmut Hullen
2011-04-03 18:53 ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-04-03 19:35 ` Helmut Hullen
2011-04-04 19:07 ` Stephane Chazelas [this message]
2011-04-06 11:43 ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-04-11 8:42 ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-04-11 9:14 ` Helmut Hullen
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=20110404190753.GC9371@yahoo.fr \
--to=stephane_chazelas@yahoo.fr \
--cc=helmut@hullen.de \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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.