All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.38.4: xfs speed problem?
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 10:33:22 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110508003321.GI26837@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1105071042210.20162@p34.internal.lan>

On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 12:09:46PM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Using 2.6.38.4 on two hosts:
> 
> Host 1:
> $ /usr/bin/time find geocities.data 1> /dev/null
> 80.92user 417.93system 2:19:07elapsed 5%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 105520maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (0major+73373minor)pagefaults 0swaps
> 
> # xfs_db -c frag -f /dev/sda1
> actual 40203982, ideal 40088075, fragmentation factor 0.29%
> 
> meta-data=/dev/sda1              isize=256    agcount=44, agsize=268435455 blks
>          =                       sectsz=512   attr=2
> data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=11718704640, imaxpct=5
>          =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
> naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0
> log      =internal               bsize=4096   blocks=521728, version=2
>          =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
> realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0
> 
> --
> 
> Host 2:
> $ /usr/bin/time find geocities.data 1>/dev/null
> 54.60user 337.20system 48:42.71elapsed 13%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 105632maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (1major+72981minor)pagefaults 0swaps
> 
> # xfs_db -c frag -f /dev/sdb1
> actual 37998306, ideal 37939331, fragmentation factor 0.16%
> 
> meta-data=/dev/sdb1              isize=256    agcount=10, agsize=268435455 blks
>          =                       sectsz=512   attr=2
> data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=2441379328, imaxpct=5
>          =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
> naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0
> log      =internal               bsize=4096   blocks=521728, version=2
>          =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
> realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Host 1: RAID-6 (7200 RPM Drives, 18+1 hot spare)

Those will be 3TB drives

> Host 2: RAID-6 (7200 RPM Drives, 12)

and those are 1TB drives.

Different hardware is guaranteed to give you different performance,
especially from a seek capability perspective.

> Each system uses a 3ware 9750-24i4e controller, same settings.
> 
> Any thoughts why one is > 2x faster than the other?

Different filesystem sizes mean different directory, inode and data
layouts, especially if you are using inode64.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.38.4: xfs speed problem?
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 10:33:22 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110508003321.GI26837@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1105071042210.20162@p34.internal.lan>

On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 12:09:46PM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Using 2.6.38.4 on two hosts:
> 
> Host 1:
> $ /usr/bin/time find geocities.data 1> /dev/null
> 80.92user 417.93system 2:19:07elapsed 5%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 105520maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (0major+73373minor)pagefaults 0swaps
> 
> # xfs_db -c frag -f /dev/sda1
> actual 40203982, ideal 40088075, fragmentation factor 0.29%
> 
> meta-data=/dev/sda1              isize=256    agcount=44, agsize=268435455 blks
>          =                       sectsz=512   attr=2
> data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=11718704640, imaxpct=5
>          =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
> naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0
> log      =internal               bsize=4096   blocks=521728, version=2
>          =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
> realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0
> 
> --
> 
> Host 2:
> $ /usr/bin/time find geocities.data 1>/dev/null
> 54.60user 337.20system 48:42.71elapsed 13%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 105632maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (1major+72981minor)pagefaults 0swaps
> 
> # xfs_db -c frag -f /dev/sdb1
> actual 37998306, ideal 37939331, fragmentation factor 0.16%
> 
> meta-data=/dev/sdb1              isize=256    agcount=10, agsize=268435455 blks
>          =                       sectsz=512   attr=2
> data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=2441379328, imaxpct=5
>          =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
> naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0
> log      =internal               bsize=4096   blocks=521728, version=2
>          =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
> realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Host 1: RAID-6 (7200 RPM Drives, 18+1 hot spare)

Those will be 3TB drives

> Host 2: RAID-6 (7200 RPM Drives, 12)

and those are 1TB drives.

Different hardware is guaranteed to give you different performance,
especially from a seek capability perspective.

> Each system uses a 3ware 9750-24i4e controller, same settings.
> 
> Any thoughts why one is > 2x faster than the other?

Different filesystem sizes mean different directory, inode and data
layouts, especially if you are using inode64.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  reply	other threads:[~2011-05-08  0:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-07 16:09 2.6.38.4: xfs speed problem? Justin Piszcz
2011-05-07 16:09 ` Justin Piszcz
2011-05-08  0:33 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2011-05-08  0:33   ` Dave Chinner
2011-05-08 17:18   ` Stan Hoeppner
2011-05-08 17:18     ` Stan Hoeppner
2011-05-09  7:53     ` Michael Monnerie

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=20110508003321.GI26837@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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.