From: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
To: Jim Faulkner <jfaulkne@ccs.neu.edu>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: worse than expected compression ratios with -o compress
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 09:12:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100118141240.GA10710@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1001161048330.16549@alumni-linux.ccs.neu.edu>
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:16:50AM -0500, Jim Faulkner wrote:
>
> I have a mysql database which consists of hundreds of millions, if not
> billions of Usenet newsgroup headers. This data should be highly
> compressable, so I put the mysql data directory on a btrfs filesystem
> mounted with the compress option:
> /dev/sdi on /var/news/mysql type btrfs (rw,noatime,compress,noacl)
>
> However, I'm not seeing the kind of compression ratios that I would
> expect with this type of data. FYI, all my tests are using Linux
> 2.6.32.3. Here's my current disk usage:
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/sdi 302G 122G 181G 41% /var/news/mysql
>
> and here's the actual size of all files:
> delta-9 mysql # pwd
> /var/news/mysql
> delta-9 mysql # du -h --max-depth=1
> 747K ./mysql
> 0 ./test
> 125G ./urd
> 125G .
> delta-9 mysql #
>
> As you can see, I am only shaving off 3 gigs out of 125 gigs worth of
> what should be very compressable data. The compressed data ends up being
> around 98% the size of the original data.
>
> To contrast, rzip can compress a database dump of this data to around 7%
> of its original size. This is an older database dump, which is why it is
> smaller. Before:
> -rw------- 1 root root 69G 2010-01-15 14:55 mysqlurdbackup.2010-01-15
> and after:
> -rw------- 1 root root 5.2G 2010-01-16 05:34 mysqlurdbackup.2010-01-15.rz
>
> Of course it took 15 hours to compress the data, and btrfs wouldn't be
> able to use rzip for compression anyway.
>
> However, I still would expect to see better compression ratios than 98%
> on such data. Are there plans to implement a better compression
> algorithm? Alternatively, is there a way to tune btrfs compression to
> achieve better ratios?
>
Currently the only compression algorithm we support is gzip, so try gzipp'ing
your database to get a better comparison. The plan is to eventually support
other compression algorithms, but currently we do not. Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-18 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-16 16:16 worse than expected compression ratios with -o compress Jim Faulkner
2010-01-17 14:34 ` Sander
2010-01-18 14:46 ` Jim Faulkner
2010-01-18 16:06 ` Jim Faulkner
2010-01-18 14:12 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2010-01-18 21:29 ` Chris Mason
2010-01-18 22:11 ` Jim Faulkner
2010-01-20 16:30 ` Chris Mason
2010-01-21 18:16 ` Jim Faulkner
2010-01-21 20:04 ` Gregory Maxwell
2010-01-21 20:07 ` Chris Mason
2010-01-21 20:05 ` Chris Mason
2010-01-21 22:38 ` Jim Faulkner
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=20100118141240.GA10710@localhost.localdomain \
--to=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=jfaulkne@ccs.neu.edu \
--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