From: Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>
To: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Migrate to bcache: A few questions
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2014 07:36:06 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52C55D36.2070201@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pan$ce6d2$f8c0c73e$1b8dc4d$cbbdd6eb@cox.net>
On 2014-01-02 03:49, Duncan wrote:
> Austin S Hemmelgarn posted on Wed, 01 Jan 2014 15:12:40 -0500 as
> excerpted:
>
>> On 12/30/2013 11:02 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
>>>
>>> As an alternative to using bcache, you might try something simmilar to
>>> the following:
>>> 64G SSD with /boot, /, and /usr Other HDD with /var, /usr/portage,
>>> /usr/src, and /home tmpfs or ramdisk for /tmp and /var/tmp
>>> This is essentially what I use now, and I have found that it
>>> significantly improves system performance.
>>>
>> On this specific note, I would actually suggest against putting the
>> portage tree on btrfs, it makes syncing go ridiculously slow,
>> and it also seems to slow down emerge as well.
>
> Interesting observation.
>
> I had not see it here (with the gentoo tree and overlays on btrfs), but
> that's very likely because all my btrfs are on SSD, as I upgraded to both
> at the same time, because my previous default filesystem choice,
> reiserfs, isn't well suited to SSD due to excessive writing due to the
> journaling.
>
> I do know slow syncs and portage dep-calculations were one of the reasons
> I switched to SSD (and thus btrfs), however. That was getting pretty
> painful on spinning rust, at least with reiserfs. And I imagine btrfs on
> single-device spinning rust would if anything be worse at least for
> syncs, due to the default dup metadata, meaning at least three writes
> (and three seeks) for each file, once for the data, twice for the
> metadata.
>
I think the triple seek+write is probably the biggest offender in my
case, although COW and autodefrag probably don't help either. I'm kind
of hesitant to put stuff that gets changed daily on a SSD, so I've ended
up putting portage on ext4 with no journaling (which out-performs every
other filesystem I have tested WRT write performance). As for the
dep-calculations, I have 16G of ram, so I just use a script to read the
entire tree into the page cache after each sync.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-02 12:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-29 21:11 Migrate to bcache: A few questions Kai Krakow
2013-12-30 1:03 ` Chris Murphy
2013-12-30 1:22 ` Kai Krakow
2013-12-30 3:48 ` Chris Murphy
2013-12-30 9:01 ` Marc MERLIN
2013-12-31 0:31 ` Kai Krakow
2013-12-30 6:24 ` Duncan
2013-12-31 3:13 ` Kai Krakow
2013-12-30 16:02 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2014-01-01 10:06 ` Duncan
2014-01-01 20:12 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2014-01-02 8:49 ` Duncan
2014-01-02 12:36 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn [this message]
2014-01-03 0:09 ` Duncan
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=52C55D36.2070201@gmail.com \
--to=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
--cc=1i5t5.duncan@cox.net \
--cc=linux-btrfs@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.