From: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@redhat.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Hang running fs_mark
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:10:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48DBFE4D.6080100@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1222376682.7028.80.camel@think.oraclecorp.com>
Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 16:37 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
>
>> Chris Mason wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 14:34 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 02:37:02PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reporting this on behalf of ric. He was running the following fs_mark command
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ./fs_mark -d /mnt/test -s 20480 -D 64 -t 8 -F
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems it hung and wasn't making any progress. He managed to get some sysrq-t,
>>>>>> which is at http://people.redhat.com/jwhiter/fs-mark-hang.txt towards the bottom
>>>>>> of the document. He could ctrl+c and unmount the fs so its not a hard hang.
>>>>>> Looks like we've just locked up behind a page lock somewhere. I have to run off
>>>>>> to class so I can't look into it too deeply so throwing this out there hoping
>>>>>> somebody else figures it out :). Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Which kernel was this?
>>>>>
>
>
>> It actually cleaned up very nicely after I killed the fs_mark processes
>> & unmounted the btrfs file system. Before doing that, the box was
>> sluggish and had the feeling of a system with something that might have
>> been spinning (but that is just an observation, not measured in any
>> strict sense).
>>
>
> Ok, I have that fs_mark test running here. How far did yours get before
> it stopped?
>
> -chris
>
>
I had gone (in heavy fsync mode) up to about 8 million files on a 1TB
s-ata disk:
17 8064000 20480 5.6 15301404
This is the new (no system sync() call) Chris special fs_mark. The rate
had been quite reasonable, starting out at around 160 20k files/sec,
went under 100 files/sec at around 3 million files and then fell under
50 files/sec at around 7.5 million before hitting this really low speed
at just under 8 million.
Maybe it really was not hung, just extremely slow...
ric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-25 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-25 17:56 Hang running fs_mark Josef Bacik
2008-09-25 18:37 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-25 18:34 ` Josef Bacik
2008-09-25 19:05 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-25 20:37 ` Ric Wheeler
2008-09-25 21:04 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-25 21:10 ` Ric Wheeler [this message]
2008-09-25 22:28 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-25 22:58 ` Ric Wheeler
2008-09-26 0:48 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-26 1:01 ` Ric Wheeler
2008-09-26 14:15 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-29 18:48 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-25 20:11 ` 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=48DBFE4D.6080100@redhat.com \
--to=rwheeler@redhat.com \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=jbacik@redhat.com \
--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