From: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 0/3] ocfs2: Inode Allocation Strategy Improvement.v2
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:37:11 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49768A57.8040508@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1232418889.6542.5.camel@tristan-laptop.cn.oracle.com>
:)
tristan.ye wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 10:35 -0800, Sunil Mushran wrote:
>
>> Good numbers. Did you a 2nd rm -rf too? It should show the largest
>> improvement of all.
>>
>
> Yes, fairly cool, we also got up to 3 mins performance gain during 2nd
> rm -rf test:
>
> =============== Tests with 10 times iteration================
> 2nd 'rm -rf' result:
>
> Average real time with 10 times:
> Original kernel kernel with enhanced patches
> 4m3.425ss 0m59.423ss
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Tristan
>
>
>> On Jan 19, 2009, at 4:57 AM, "tristan.ye" <tristan.ye@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 15:15 +0800, Tao Ma wrote:
>>>
>>>> tristan.ye wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 07:17 -0800, Sunil Mushran wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> How big is this disk? Maybe one kernel tree untar is not be
>>>>>> enough to
>>>>>> expose the original issue. Also, use ls -i and/or debugfs to see if
>>>>>> the inodes have some locality.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Tao, sunil
>>>>>
>>>>> I've tested it out with more attempts, it may have something to do
>>>>> with
>>>>> the disk size. but the root pause why i did not get a excited
>>>>> speed-up
>>>>> performance gain was due to the iscsi-target(iscsi server) cache.
>>>>> the
>>>>> operation in your testcase which was meant for cache dropping is
>>>>> aimed
>>>>> at client side(a 'echo 2>/proc/sys/vm/drop_cache' only flush the
>>>>> fs's
>>>>> cache for iscsi initor(isci client)).
>>>>>
>>>>> Tao,
>>>>>
>>>>> You can verify this by pausing the tests at the right point before
>>>>> we
>>>>> start '2rd ls -lR', then flush the iscsi-target's cache by 'service
>>>>> iscsi-target restart'(there may be a more graceful way to do
>>>>> this),after
>>>>> this done, resume the tests, then you'll find the the realtime it
>>>>> consumed will be up to 3 mins around:)
>>>>>
>>>> cool, so I am very glad that you got the same result as mine. ;)
>>>>
>>>>> Btw, i really saw lots of locality by 'ls -li' for inodes under a
>>>>> same
>>>>> dir, take /mnt/ocfs2/linux-2.6.28/include/linux for instance,
>>>>> almost all
>>>>> of its inodes are contiguous one by one regarding to its inode
>>>>> number.
>>>>>
>>>> yeah, that is the desired behaviour with my 3 patches. :)
>>>>
>>>> Then do you have any updated test statistics?
>>>>
>>> Tao,
>>>
>>> With iscsi-target cache flushed everytime before tests getting
>>> started,
>>> following is the updated testing result:
>>>
>>> Testing node:test7
>>> Testing volume: iscsi sdd1
>>>
>>> =============== Tests with 10 times iteration================
>>>
>>> 1st 'Tar xjvf' result:
>>>
>>> Average real time with 10 times:
>>> Original kernel kernel with enhanced
>>> patches
>>> 0m 22.468s 0m 23.472s
>>>
>>> 1st 'ls -lR' result:
>>> Average real time with 10 times:
>>> Original kernel kernel with enhanced
>>> patches
>>> 0m 30.682s 0m 30.414s
>>>
>>> 1st 'rm -rf' result:
>>> Average real time with 10 times:
>>> Original kernel kernel with enhanced
>>> patches
>>> 0m 1m5.715s 0m 1m3.835s
>>>
>>> 2rd 'Tar xjvf' result:
>>> Average real time with 10 times:
>>> Original kernel kernel with enhanced
>>> patches
>>> 0m 31.550s 0m 28.726s
>>>
>>> 2rd 'ls -lR' result:
>>> Average real time with 10 times:
>>> Original kernel kernel with enhanced
>>> patches
>>>
>>> 0m 3m5.772s 0m 30.274s
>>>
>>> ===============Tests end============================
>>>
>>> Glad to see your guy's patch has greatly improved the performance of
>>> inodes traversing:),
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, the 1st Tar testcase still get a performance
>>> penality(around 1s) everytime.
>>>
>>> I've kept the testing env on test7 for your verification.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Tristan
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Tao
>>>>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-21 2:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-15 21:58 [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 0/3] ocfs2: Inode Allocation Strategy Improvement.v2 Tao Ma
2009-01-15 22:00 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 1/3] ocfs2: Optimize inode allocation by remembering last group Tao Ma
2009-01-15 22:00 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 2/3] ocfs2: Allocate inode groups from global_bitmap Tao Ma
2009-01-15 22:00 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 3/3] ocfs2: Optimize inode group allocation by recording last used group Tao Ma
2009-01-16 8:05 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 0/3] ocfs2: Inode Allocation Strategy Improvement.v2 tristan.ye
2009-01-16 8:16 ` Tao Ma
2009-01-16 16:08 ` tristan.ye
2009-01-18 8:58 ` Tao Ma
2009-01-18 15:17 ` Sunil Mushran
2009-01-19 7:07 ` tristan.ye
2009-01-19 7:15 ` Tao Ma
2009-01-19 12:57 ` tristan.ye
2009-01-19 18:35 ` Sunil Mushran
2009-01-20 2:34 ` tristan.ye
2009-01-21 2:37 ` Sunil Mushran [this message]
2009-01-18 15:18 ` Sunil Mushran
2009-02-13 2:42 ` tristan.ye
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=49768A57.8040508@oracle.com \
--to=sunil.mushran@oracle.com \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.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.