From: Tomasz Torcz <tomek@pipebreaker.pl>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: yum upgrade on btrfs very slow
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:43:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090930194350.GA29166@mother.pipebreaker.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090929132538.GN6405@think>
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 09:25:38AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 08:18:22AM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 09:35:43AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > Every yum activity is very slow, like 15 minutes for installation of 11
> > > > packages 25MB in size. Kernel is 2.6.31.1-48.fc12.x86_64, btrfs-progs-0.19-7.fc12.x86_64.
> > > > Hardware is pentium 4 3.0 GHz (Hyperthreading, 64 bit), with single IDE disk
> > > > on Intel ICH controller.
> > >
> > > You're doing quite a lot of reads, and some writes. Could you please
> > > capture the output of sysrq-w at 5s intervals during the upgrade?
> >
> > It got quite big (over 100 KiB, over 1 MiB after unpacking), so I
> > put it at http://pipebreaker.pl/dump/sysrq-w_every_5_sec.txt.bz2
>
> Ok, you've got 158 sysrq-w runs in here, and 119 of them involve fsync.
> This is good because it is what Josef expected the problem to be.
>
> The first thing I would try is mount -o ssd. I think what is happening
> is that we are seeking around while fsyncing files. mount -o ssd isn't
> really the right long term answer but it will tell us if I've got it
> right.
Tried that. Not noticable faster. Dumps are here:
http://pipebreaker.pl/dump/sysrq_w-with_ssd.txt.bz2
http://pipebreaker.pl/dump/vmstat-with.ssd.txt.bz2
>
> If you're comparing w/ext3 and wondering why btrfs is sooooooo much
> slower it might be because btrfs has barriers on by default and ext3
> doesn't. You could mount -o nobarrier for btrfs or mount -o barrier=1
> for ext3 for a proper comparison.
>
> (Assuming your dmesg doesn't have messages from btrfs about disabling
> barriers).
I wouldn't expect barriers to work here (reminder, this is PATA drive
on ICH7 sata controller), but I will test tomorrow with nobarrier.
Then I probably check his "yum upgrade" under seekwatcher on friday.
--
Tomasz Torcz Morality must always be based on practicality.
xmpp: zdzichubg@chrome.pl -- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-30 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-28 12:18 yum upgrade on btrfs very slow Tomasz Torcz
2009-09-28 13:35 ` Chris Mason
2009-09-29 6:18 ` Tomasz Torcz
2009-09-29 13:25 ` Chris Mason
2009-09-30 19:43 ` Tomasz Torcz [this message]
2009-10-01 9:01 ` Tomasz Torcz
2009-10-21 9:27 ` Tomasz Torcz
2009-10-26 8:55 ` Chris Mason
2009-10-26 13:35 ` Tomasz Torcz
2009-10-01 9:04 ` Jens Axboe
2009-10-05 12:09 ` Ric Wheeler
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=20090930194350.GA29166@mother.pipebreaker.pl \
--to=tomek@pipebreaker.pl \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox