* How long will a shrinkfs take?
@ 2004-06-10 20:13 David Greaves
2004-06-10 20:54 ` Alex Zarochentsev
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Greaves @ 2004-06-10 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: reiserfs-list
Hi
I have a 1Tb reiserfs that I want to shrink to 500Gb
400Gb of data is used.
Any estimates as to how long this will take?
Sustained I/O is about 33Mb/s at the fs level, 44 Mb/s at the lv level
and 65Mb/s at the md0 level.
(I didn't expect the fs to be so slow so I'm going to try a few tuning
params on the new 500Gb space before copying over the data and growing
back to a Tb)
Is it proportional to the amount of shrinkage (ie 2 hrs to reduce by
50G, 20 hrs to reduce by 500Gb)
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: How long will a shrinkfs take?
2004-06-10 20:13 How long will a shrinkfs take? David Greaves
@ 2004-06-10 20:54 ` Alex Zarochentsev
2004-06-11 8:29 ` David Greaves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alex Zarochentsev @ 2004-06-10 20:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Greaves; +Cc: reiserfs-list
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 09:13:35PM +0100, David Greaves wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have a 1Tb reiserfs that I want to shrink to 500Gb
> 400Gb of data is used.
>
> Any estimates as to how long this will take?
> Sustained I/O is about 33Mb/s at the fs level, 44 Mb/s at the lv level
> and 65Mb/s at the md0 level.
ReiserFs shrinker reads all tree nodes as fsck does (reiserfsck --check may be
used for rough estimation) plus shrinker writes relocated nodes (this highly
depends on how many nodes are above 500GB boundary).
Anyway running reiserfsck --check before shrinking is a good practice.
>
> (I didn't expect the fs to be so slow so I'm going to try a few tuning
> params on the new 500Gb space before copying over the data and growing
> back to a Tb)
>
> Is it proportional to the amount of shrinkage (ie 2 hrs to reduce by
> 50G, 20 hrs to reduce by 500Gb)
> David
--
Alex.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: How long will a shrinkfs take?
2004-06-10 20:54 ` Alex Zarochentsev
@ 2004-06-11 8:29 ` David Greaves
2004-06-11 8:53 ` Alex Zarochentsev
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Greaves @ 2004-06-11 8:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Zarochentsev; +Cc: reiserfs-list
Alex Zarochentsev wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 09:13:35PM +0100, David Greaves wrote:
>
>
>>Hi
>>
>>I have a 1Tb reiserfs that I want to shrink to 500Gb
>>400Gb of data is used.
>>
>>Any estimates as to how long this will take?
>>Sustained I/O is about 33Mb/s at the fs level, 44 Mb/s at the lv level
>>and 65Mb/s at the md0 level.
>>
>>
>
>ReiserFs shrinker reads all tree nodes as fsck does (reiserfsck --check may be
>used for rough estimation) plus shrinker writes relocated nodes (this highly
>depends on how many nodes are above 500GB boundary).
>
>
OK - well I know that fsck --check is of the order of minutes rather
than hours (did that rather too recently ;) )
So if I asume even spread, 50% is above so 200 Gb needs reading + then
writing so say 1Gb/min = 3-4 hours
OK ta.
BTW, is resizefs safely interruptible? So can I run it for a couple of
hours, interrupt, fsck, remount and do it again?
(The system's in use and I only get short windows when I can do this
kind of thing)
I understand that if this happens the fs won't have been resized.
I envisage the behaviour to be:
1 calc new top boundary
2 scan for files (nodes) with data above boundary
3 foreach file
3.1 copy data below boundary
3.2 change node to reflect new position
3.3 mark old space as free
4 set new top boundary
most of the time being spent in 3.
David
>Anyway running reiserfsck --check before shrinking is a good practice.
>
>
>
>>(I didn't expect the fs to be so slow so I'm going to try a few tuning
>>params on the new 500Gb space before copying over the data and growing
>>back to a Tb)
>>
>>Is it proportional to the amount of shrinkage (ie 2 hrs to reduce by
>>50G, 20 hrs to reduce by 500Gb)
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>David
>>
>>
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: How long will a shrinkfs take?
2004-06-11 8:29 ` David Greaves
@ 2004-06-11 8:53 ` Alex Zarochentsev
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alex Zarochentsev @ 2004-06-11 8:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Greaves; +Cc: reiserfs-list
On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 09:29:11AM +0100, David Greaves wrote:
> Alex Zarochentsev wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 09:13:35PM +0100, David Greaves wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hi
> >>
> >>I have a 1Tb reiserfs that I want to shrink to 500Gb
> >>400Gb of data is used.
> >>
> >>Any estimates as to how long this will take?
> >>Sustained I/O is about 33Mb/s at the fs level, 44 Mb/s at the lv level
> >>and 65Mb/s at the md0 level.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >ReiserFs shrinker reads all tree nodes as fsck does (reiserfsck --check
> >may be
> >used for rough estimation) plus shrinker writes relocated nodes (this
> >highly
> >depends on how many nodes are above 500GB boundary).
> >
> >
> OK - well I know that fsck --check is of the order of minutes rather
> than hours (did that rather too recently ;) )
>
> So if I asume even spread, 50% is above so 200 Gb needs reading + then
> writing so say 1Gb/min = 3-4 hours
>
> OK ta.
>
> BTW, is resizefs safely interruptible? So can I run it for a couple of
> hours, interrupt, fsck, remount and do it again?
> (The system's in use and I only get short windows when I can do this
> kind of thing)
no. interrupting it is not safe. fs errors are not so serious, but bitmap content does not
match relocated tree so fsck would suggest --rebuild-tree.
> I understand that if this happens the fs won't have been resized.
>
> I envisage the behaviour to be:
> 1 calc new top boundary
> 2 scan for files (nodes) with data above boundary
it scans internal reiserfs tree, not fs tree.
> 3 foreach file
> 3.1 copy data below boundary
> 3.2 change node to reflect new position
> 3.3 mark old space as free
> 4 set new top boundary
>
> most of the time being spent in 3.
>
> David
>
> >Anyway running reiserfsck --check before shrinking is a good practice.
> >
> >
> >
> >>(I didn't expect the fs to be so slow so I'm going to try a few tuning
> >>params on the new 500Gb space before copying over the data and growing
> >>back to a Tb)
> >>
> >>Is it proportional to the amount of shrinkage (ie 2 hrs to reduce by
> >>50G, 20 hrs to reduce by 500Gb)
> >>
> >>David
--
Alex.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-06-11 8:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-06-10 20:13 How long will a shrinkfs take? David Greaves
2004-06-10 20:54 ` Alex Zarochentsev
2004-06-11 8:29 ` David Greaves
2004-06-11 8:53 ` Alex Zarochentsev
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.