All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alan Piszcz <ap@solarrain.com>
Subject: Re: EXT4 is ~2X as slow as XFS (593MB/s vs 304MB/s) for writes?
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 18:37:39 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B8C5DD3.4060804@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B8C56F8.70503@redhat.com>

Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Justin Piszcz wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Is it possible to 'optimize' ext4 so it is as fast as XFS for writes?
>> I see about half the performance as XFS for sequential writes.
>>
>> I have checked the doc and tried several options, a few of which are shown
>> below (I have also tried the commit/journal_async/etc options but none
>> of them get the write speeds anywhere near XFS)?
>>
>> Sure 'dd' is not a real benchmark, etc, etc, but with 10Gbps between 2
>> hosts I get 550MiB/s+ on reads from EXT4 but only 100-200MiB/s write.
>>
>> When it was XFS I used to get 400-600MiB/s for writes for the same RAID
>> volume.
>>
>> How do I 'speed' up ext4?  Is it possible?
>>
> 
> FWIW I'm seeing similar things on fast storage (Fusion IO),
> though this is under 2.6.31.  500MB/s+ for xfs, 300 for ext4.
> 
> Overwriting an existing file is no faster.   I don't think this
> driver is blktraceable but I'll try a newer driver that should be I think.

FWIW, blktrace (I'm still on 2.6.31) is enlightening:

Total (xfs):
 Reads Queued:           4,       16KiB	 Writes Queued:     122,567,   10,485MiB
 Read Dispatches:        4,       16KiB	 Write Dispatches:   83,219,   10,485MiB
 Reads Requeued:         0		 Writes Requeued:         0
 Reads Completed:        4,       16KiB	 Writes Completed:   83,219,   10,485MiB
 Read Merges:            0,        0KiB	 Write Merges:       39,348,  314,804KiB
 IO unplugs:           344        	 Timer unplugs:         338

Total (ext4):
 Reads Queued:          14,       56KiB	 Writes Queued:       2,621K,   10,486MiB
 Read Dispatches:       14,       56KiB	 Write Dispatches:  107,944,   10,486MiB
 Reads Requeued:         0		 Writes Requeued:         0
 Reads Completed:       14,       56KiB	 Writes Completed:  107,944,   10,486MiB
 Read Merges:            0,        0KiB	 Write Merges:        2,513K,   10,054MiB
 IO unplugs:         2,461        	 Timer unplugs:       2,020


See "Writes Queued"  See also submit_bio() calls in xfs.

ext4 doing things a block at a time is certainly giving the elevator a workout...
I'd tend to chalk it up to that at first glance.

-Eric

      reply	other threads:[~2010-03-02  0:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-27  0:31 EXT4 is ~2X as slow as XFS (593MB/s vs 304MB/s) for writes? Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27  0:46 ` Dmitry Monakhov
2010-02-27  1:05   ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27  1:05     ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-28  0:56     ` Asdo
2010-02-28  9:59       ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27  0:51 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-02-27  1:08   ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27  1:12     ` Eric Sandeen
2010-02-27  1:28       ` Eric Sandeen
2010-02-27 10:14         ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 10:51           ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 11:09             ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 11:36               ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-28  5:42                 ` tytso
2010-02-28 14:55                   ` Justin Piszcz
2010-03-01  8:39                     ` Andreas Dilger
2010-03-01  9:21                       ` Justin Piszcz
2010-03-01 14:48                         ` Michael Tokarev
2010-03-01 15:07                           ` Justin Piszcz
2010-03-01 16:15                     ` Eric Sandeen
2010-02-28 23:50                 ` Dave Chinner
2010-03-02  0:08 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-03-02  0:37   ` Eric Sandeen [this message]

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=4B8C5DD3.4060804@redhat.com \
    --to=sandeen@redhat.com \
    --cc=ap@solarrain.com \
    --cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --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.