linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David McBride <dwm@doc.ic.ac.uk>
To: "Swâmi Petaramesh" <swami@petaramesh.org>
Cc: linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Rename BTRfs to MuchSlowerFS ?
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:17:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E64D9F3.9010201@doc.ic.ac.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E64D3D5.7020407@petaramesh.org>

On 05/09/11 14:51, =EF=BF=BD wrote:

> Given 4 laptops, the most powerful of which was running BTRFS and the=
 others
> ext3 or ext4, all machines running Ubuntu 11.04 Natty 32-bit with a s=
tock
> Ubuntu 2.6.38-11 kernel, all machines were given the following FS-int=
ensive
> task :

(dpkg-intensive workload)

> All 3 ext3 /  ext4 machines took between 60 and 90 minutes to complet=
e their
> upgrade.
>=20
> BTRFS machine took 20 HOURS so far, still counting (ETA 15 minutes le=
ft).
>=20
> Wow. Impressive.

I see similar behaviour on a single-disk workstation. This is a consequ=
ence of
dpkg's heavy use of fsync() to ensure that changes to the filesystem ar=
e done
safely, to try to ensure that a sudden crash or power interruption does=
n't
leave the machine in an inconsistent or unrecoverable state.

(You can see that btrfs performs speedily if fsync is disabled via, for
example, `eatmydata`.  Which is not a production-worthy workaround for =
the
majority of cases, but usefully highlights what's going wrong.)

See also:
  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dpkg/+bug/607632
  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D635993

Now, I don't know why btrfs is particularly slow with a (relatively?)
fsync-heavy workload, though I do note that a commit went into 3.0 that
improved some fsync workloads; see commit:
8e531cdfeb75269c6c5aae33651cca39707848da

However, in my own testing, it doesn't seem to have improved matters
significantly.

There were also a number of fsync-related improvements made in 2.6.32; =
perhaps
there have been regressions since then?

It seems clear that the dpkg developers consider this to be reasonable
behaviour on their part; is there any scope for improvements to be made=
 to
btrfs to cope better with this kind of workload?  Or is this an unavoid=
able
property of the datastructures it's using?

Cheers,
David
--=20
David McBride <dwm@doc.ic.ac.uk>
Department of Computing, Imperial College, London
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" =
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-09-05 14:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-05 13:51 Rename BTRfs to MuchSlowerFS ? Swâmi Petaramesh
2011-09-05 14:00 ` Hugo Mills
2011-09-05 14:20   ` Roman Mamedov
2011-09-05 17:10     ` Elric Milon
2011-09-05 14:17 ` David McBride [this message]
2011-09-05 19:25 ` Sergei Trofimovich
2011-09-06 15:30   ` Swâmi Petaramesh
2011-09-06 17:11     ` Fajar A. Nugraha
2011-09-07 14:15       ` Swâmi Petaramesh
2011-09-15 19:37         ` Felix Blanke
2011-09-15 22:16           ` Fajar A. Nugraha
2011-09-16  6:21             ` Maciej Marcin Piechotka
2011-09-16  6:42               ` Fajar A. Nugraha
2011-09-16  8:39                 ` Maciej Marcin Piechotka
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-09-05 16:23 Tomasz Chmielewski
2011-09-05 16:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-05 16:29   ` Hugo Mills
2011-09-08  7:04     ` youagree

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=4E64D9F3.9010201@doc.ic.ac.uk \
    --to=dwm@doc.ic.ac.uk \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=swami@petaramesh.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).