From: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com>
Cc: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@thunk.org>,
"linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: large file system & high object count testing
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:01:36 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A9C3A30.5060401@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090831201932.GD4197@webber.adilger.int>
On 08/31/2009 04:19 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Aug 31, 2009 12:34 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
>> We have put together a very large, relatively slow JBOD to test
>> scalability with (big server, 40GB of DRAM, 8 CPU's + 4 SAS expansion
>> shelves, each with 16 2TB WD S-ATA drives).
>>
>> In all, this is pulled together with DM (striped) to give us a bit over
>> 116TB.
>>
>> Testing was done on 2.6.31-rc6 along with the pu branches e2fsprogs.
>>
>> Everything went well until after the fsck - I think that I have
>> reproduced that earlier issue with a failed mount.
>>
>> mkfs took a very long time - longer than fsck. fsck (with around 500
>> million 20KB files) finished in just under 2 hours.
>
> Fixing the kernel to do the "safe zeroing of inode table blocks" would
> allow mke2fs to be MUCH faster than it is today...
>
>> real 230m6.362s
>> user 2m30.844s
>> sys 200m1.002s
>
> Ouch, 4h is a long time, but hopefully not many people have to reformat
> their 120TB filesystem on a regular basis.
Seems that it should not take longer than fsck in any case? Might be interesting
to use bkltrace/seekwatcher to see if it is thrashing these big, slow drives
around...
>
>> [root@megadeth e2fsck]# time ./e2fsck -f -tt /dev/vg_wdc_disks/lv_wdc_disks
>> e2fsck 1.41.8 (20-Jul-2009)
>> Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
>> Pass 1: Memory used: 1280k/18014398508273796k (1130k/151k), time:
>> 4630.05/780.40/3580.01
>
> Sigh, we need better memory accounting in e2fsck. Rather than depending
> on the VM/glibc to track that for us, how hard would it be to just add
> a counter into e2fsck_{get,free,resize}_mem() to track this?
That second number looks like a bug, not a real memory number. The largest
memory allocation I saw while it ran with top was around 6-7GB iirc.
>
>> REMOUNT:
>>
>> [root@megadeth e2fsck]# mount /dev/vg_wdc_disks/lv_wdc_disks /test_fs/
>> mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on
>> /dev/mapper/vg_wdc_disks-lv_wdc_disks,
>> missing codepage or helper program, or other error
>> In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try
>> dmesg | tail or so
>>
>> [root@megadeth ~]# tail -20 /var/log/messages
>> <snip>
>> Aug 31 12:27:12 megadeth kernel: EXT4-fs (dm-75):
>> ext4_check_descriptors: Checksum for group 487 failed (59799!=46827)
>> Aug 31 12:27:12 megadeth kernel: EXT4-fs (dm-75): group descriptors
>> corrupted!
>
> Hmm, is e2fsck computing the 64-byte group descriptor checksum differently
> than the kernel? Can we dump the group descriptors before and after the
> e2fsck run to see whether they have been modified without any messages to
> the console?
>
> Cheers, Andreas
I tried to verify that by redoing a shorter run with fs_mark, unmount/remount
(no fsck in the middle).
That file system remounted with no corrupted group descriptors.
Running fsck on it & remounting reproduces the error (although, again, no fixes
reported during the run).
Running fsck on it after the first corruption did indeed fix it & I could remount.
Do you have a specific debugfs/other command I should use to poke at it with?
Thanks!
Ric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-31 21:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-31 16:34 large file system & high object count testing Ric Wheeler
2009-08-31 17:02 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-31 20:56 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-08-31 21:02 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-31 21:25 ` Justin Maggard
2009-08-31 22:20 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-31 23:13 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-08-31 23:37 ` Justin Maggard
2009-09-02 9:15 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-08-31 20:19 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-08-31 21:01 ` Ric Wheeler [this message]
2009-08-31 23:16 ` Andreas Dilger
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=4A9C3A30.5060401@redhat.com \
--to=rwheeler@redhat.com \
--cc=adilger@sun.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@thunk.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.