Re: reiser fs slow on mksf and mount

["Vladimir V. Saveliev" <vs@namesys.com>]

Hello

Ming Zhang wrote:
> Hi, folks
> 
> I am not sure if this is normal or not.
> 
> I try to create&use a reiserfs on a 8 disk raid0. Then I found that mkfs
> need ~90 sec and mount need ~70 seconds. 
> 
> Is there anything wrong on my side?
> 

Your device is too big.

> Thanks!
> 
> 
> Ming
> 
> 
> 
> Detailed info followed.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [root@bakstor2u root]# cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid5] [multipath] [raid6]
> [raid10] [faulty]
> md0 : active raid0 sda[0] sdh[7] sdg[6] sdf[5] sde[4] sdd[3] sdc[2] sdb
> [1]
>       3125690368 blocks 64k chunks
> 
> unused devices: <none>
> 
> [root@bakstor2u root]# time mkfs.reiserfs /dev/md0 -ff
> mkfs.reiserfs 3.6.13 (2003 www.namesys.com)
> 
> <...>
> 
> Guessing about desired format.. Kernel 2.6.11.12 is running.
> Format 3.6 with standard journal
> Count of blocks on the device: 781422592
> Number of blocks consumed by mkreiserfs formatting process: 32059
> Blocksize: 4096
> Hash function used to sort names: "r5"
> Journal Size 8193 blocks (first block 18)
> Journal Max transaction length 1024
> inode generation number: 0
> UUID: 98d990f3-d54f-43e3-9fde-8c9c9a6d3481
> Initializing journal - 0%....20%....40%....60%....80%....100%
> Syncing..ok
> 
> Tell your friends to use a kernel based on 2.4.18 or later, and
> especially not a
> kernel based on 2.4.9, when you use reiserFS. Have fun.
> 
> ReiserFS is successfully created on /dev/md0.
> 
> real    1m28.783s
> user    0m0.151s
> sys     0m0.398s
> 

Hmm, mkfs.reiserfs had to write 32059 blocks. It is about 131mb. 1m28s is too much for that.
Could it be that some of disks used in that raid were not spinning when you started mkreiserfs?

> [root@bakstor2u root]# time mount /dev/md0  t
> 
> real    1m11.448s
> user    0m0.000s
> sys     0m0.225s
> 

There is a patch to cure this problem.
http://www.mail-archive.com/reiserfs-list@namesys.com/msg18442.html
Please note that it is experimental one.

> 
> 
>