From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Anton Gavriliuk <antosha20xx@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Sequential read from NVMe/XFS twice slower on Fedora 42 than on Rocky 9.5
Date: Sun, 4 May 2025 08:16:18 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aBaVsli2AKbIa4We@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAiJnjoo0--yp47UKZhbu8sNSZN6DZ-QzmZBMmtr1oC=fOOgAQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, May 04, 2025 at 12:04:16AM +0300, Anton Gavriliuk wrote:
> There are 12 Kioxia CM-7 NVMe SSDs configured in mdadm/raid0 and
> mounted to /mnt.
>
> Exactly the same fio command running under Fedora 42
> (6.14.5-300.fc42.x86_64) and then under Rocky 9.5
> (5.14.0-503.40.1.el9_5.x86_64) shows twice the performance difference.
>
> /mnt/testfile size 1TB
> server's total dram 192GB
>
> Fedora 42
>
> [root@localhost ~]# fio --name=test --rw=read --bs=256k
> --filename=/mnt/testfile --direct=1 --numjobs=1 --iodepth=64 --exitall
> --group_reporting --ioengine=libaio --runtime=30 --time_based
> test: (g=0): rw=read, bs=(R) 256KiB-256KiB, (W) 256KiB-256KiB, (T)
> 256KiB-256KiB, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
> fio-3.39-44-g19d9
> Starting 1 process
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [R(1)][100.0%][r=49.6GiB/s][r=203k IOPS][eta 00m:00s]
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2465: Sat May 3 17:51:24 2025
> read: IOPS=203k, BW=49.6GiB/s (53.2GB/s)(1487GiB/30001msec)
> slat (usec): min=3, max=1053, avg= 4.60, stdev= 1.76
> clat (usec): min=104, max=4776, avg=310.53, stdev=29.49
> lat (usec): min=110, max=4850, avg=315.13, stdev=29.82
> Rocky 9.5
>
> [root@localhost ~]# fio --name=test --rw=read --bs=256k
> --filename=/mnt/testfile --direct=1 --numjobs=1 --iodepth=64 --exitall
> --group_reporting --ioengine=libaio --runtime=30 --time_based
> test: (g=0): rw=read, bs=(R) 256KiB-256KiB, (W) 256KiB-256KiB, (T)
> 256KiB-256KiB, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
> fio-3.39-44-g19d9
> Starting 1 process
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [R(1)][100.0%][r=96.0GiB/s][r=393k IOPS][eta 00m:00s]
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=15467: Sun May 4 00:00:39 2025
> read: IOPS=390k, BW=95.3GiB/s (102GB/s)(2860GiB/30001msec)
> slat (nsec): min=1111, max=183816, avg=2117.94, stdev=1412.34
> clat (usec): min=81, max=1086, avg=161.60, stdev=19.67
> lat (usec): min=82, max=1240, avg=163.72, stdev=19.73
>
Completely latency has doubled on the fc42 kernel. For a read, there
isn't much in terms of filesystem work to be done on direct IO
completion, so I'm not sure this is a filesystem issue...
What's the comparitive performance of an identical read profile
directly on the raw MD raid0 device?
-Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-03 22:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-03 21:04 Sequential read from NVMe/XFS twice slower on Fedora 42 than on Rocky 9.5 Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-03 22:16 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2025-05-04 7:22 ` Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-04 21:50 ` Dave Chinner
2025-05-05 12:29 ` Laurence Oberman
2025-05-05 13:21 ` Laurence Oberman
2025-05-05 17:39 ` Laurence Oberman
2025-05-22 15:07 ` Laurence Oberman
2025-05-23 9:39 ` Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-05 22:56 ` Dave Chinner
2025-05-06 11:03 ` Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-06 21:46 ` Dave Chinner
2025-05-07 12:26 ` Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-07 21:59 ` Dave Chinner
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=aBaVsli2AKbIa4We@dread.disaster.area \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=antosha20xx@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@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.