From: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
To: Kevin Jacobs <jacobs@penguin.theopalgroup.com>
Cc: akpm@digeo.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ext3 meta-data performance
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 01:04:21 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3ED772F5.8060100@cyberone.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0305290923330.11990-100000@penguin.theopalgroup.com>
Kevin Jacobs wrote:
>On Thu, 29 May 2003, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>Kevin Jacobs wrote:
>>
>>>[...]
>>>Since these rsync backups are done in addition to traditional daily tape
>>>backups, we've taken the system out of production use and opened the door
>>>for experimentation. So, the next logical step was to try a 2.5 kernel.
>>>After some work, I've gotten 2.5.70-mm2 booting and it is _much_ better than
>>>the Redhat 2.4 kernels, and the system interactivity is flawless. However,
>>>the speed of creating hard-links is still three and a half times slower than
>>>with the old 2.2 kernel. It now takes ~14 minutes to create the links, and
>>>
>>>from what I can tell, the bottlenecks is not the CPU or the disk-throughput.
>>
>>Its probably seek bound.
>>Provide some more information about your disk/partition setup, and external
>>journals, and data= mode. Remember ext3 will generally always have to do
>>more work than ext2.
>>
>
> SCSI ID 1 3ware 7500-8 ATA RAID Controller
>
> * Array Unit 0 Mirror (RAID 1) 40.01 GB OK
> + Port 0 WDC WD400BB-00DEA0 40.02 GB OK
> + Port 1 WDC WD400BB-00DEA0 40.02 GB OK
> * Array Unit 4 Striped with Parity 64K (RAID 5) 555.84 GB OK
> + Port 4 IC35L180AVV207-1 185.28 GB OK
> + Port 5 IC35L180AVV207-1 185.28 GB OK
> + Port 6 IC35L180AVV207-1 185.28 GB OK
> + Port 7 IC35L180AVV207-1 185.28 GB OK
>
>Disk /dev/sda: 40.0 GB, 40019615744 bytes
>255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 4865 cylinders
>Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
>/dev/sda1 * 1 261 2096451 83 Linux
>/dev/sda2 262 1566 10482412+ 83 Linux
>/dev/sda3 1567 4570 24129630 83 Linux
>/dev/sda4 4571 4865 2369587+ f Win95 Ext'd (LBA)
>/dev/sda5 4571 4589 152586 83 Linux
>/dev/sda6 4590 4734 1164681 83 Linux
>/dev/sda7 4735 4865 1052226 83 Linux
>
>Disk /dev/sdb: 555.8 GB, 555847581696 bytes
>255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 67577 cylinders
>Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
>/dev/sdb1 * 1 67577 542812221 83 Linux
>
>Unit 0 is /dev/sda and the journal is /dev/sda5. Unit 1 is /dev/sdb and the
>backup filesystem is /dev/sdb1. The data= mode is whatever is default,
>/dev/sdb1 is mounted noatime. I've also applied the journal_refile_buffer
>patch posted by AKPM yesterday morning.
>
I think you should have your journal on its own spinde if
you are going to the trouble of having an external one.
>
>>If you want to play with the scheduler, try set
>>/sys/block/blockdev*/queue/nr_requests = 8192
>>
>
>This killed the entire system -- livelocking it with no disk activity to the
>point that I had to hit the reset button. So does setting nr_requests on
>sda and sdb from 128 to 256. The problems hit before the rsync, during a
>'rm -Rf' on a previously copied tree.
>
OK I'll have a look into that.
>
>>then try
>>/sys/block/blockdev*/queue/iosched/antic_expire = 0
>>
>
>This seemed to make no difference.
>
Thats alright then.
>
>>Try the above combinations with and without a big TCQ depth. You should
>>be able to set them on the fly and see what happens to throughput during
>>the operation. Let me know what you see.
>>
>
>I'm not sure how to change TCQ depth on the fly. Last I knew, it was a
>compiled-in parameter.
>
Don't worry too much about this. Its probably not a big issue.
>
>I have some more time to experiment, so please let me know if there is
>anything else you think I should try.
>
Andrew might be able to suggest some worthwhile tests, if nothing
else, try mounting your filesystems as ext2, so you can get a
baseline figure.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-30 14:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-29 12:49 Ext3 meta-data performance Kevin Jacobs
2003-05-29 13:04 ` Nick Piggin
2003-05-30 10:09 ` Kevin Jacobs
2003-05-30 15:04 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2003-05-30 16:21 ` Andrew Morton
2003-05-30 17:44 ` Andreas Dilger
2003-06-04 16:57 ` Petro
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=3ED772F5.8060100@cyberone.com.au \
--to=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=jacobs@penguin.theopalgroup.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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.