linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lubos Kolouch <lubos.kolouch@gmail.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: extremely slow syncing on btrfs with 2.6.39.1
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 07:52:54 +0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ivgugm$6i2$1@dough.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 4E1BF52E.9090100@mobileobjects.de

Jan Stilow, Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:18:06 +0200:

> On 07/11/2011 02:18 AM, Kok, Auke-jan H wrote:
>> I've been monitoring the lists for a while now but didn't see this
>> problem mentioned in particular: I've got a fairly standard desktop
>> system at home, 700gb WD drive, nothing special, with 2 btrfs
>> filesystems and some snapshots. The system runs for days, and I've
>> noticed unusual disk activity the other evening - turns out that it's
>> taking forever to sync().
>> 
>> $ uname -r
>> 2.6.39.1
>> $ grep btrfs /proc/mounts
>> /dev/root / btrfs rw,relatime 0 0    # is /dev/sdb2 # /dev/sdb5 /home
>> btrfs rw,relatime 0 0 $ time sync
>> 
>> real	1m5.552s
>> user	0m0.000s
>> sys	0m2.102s
>> 
>> $ time sync
>> 
>> real	1m16.830s
>> user	0m0.001s
>> sys	0m1.490s
>> 
>> $ df -h / /home
>> Filesystem      Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/root        47G  
>> 33G  7.7G  82% / /dev/sdb5       652G  216G  421G  34% /home $ btrfs fi
>> df /
>> Data: total=35.48GB, used=29.86GB
>> System, DUP: total=16.00MB, used=12.00KB System: total=4.00MB,
>> used=0.00
>> Metadata, DUP: total=4.50GB, used=1.67GB
>>  $ btrfs fi df /home
>> Data: total=310.01GB, used=209.53GB
>> System, DUP: total=8.00MB, used=48.00KB System: total=4.00MB, used=0.00
>> Metadata, DUP: total=11.00GB, used=2.98GB Metadata: total=8.00MB,
>> used=0.00
>> 
>> I'll switch to 3.0 soon, but, given the fact that we're going to be
>> running MeeGo on 2.6.39 probably for a while, I was wondering if anyone
>> knows off the top of their heads if this issue is known/identified. If
>> not then I'll need to make someone do some patching ;).
>> 
>> Auke
> 
> You should read the thread "Abysmal Performance" of these mailing list
> from last month. They had a similar problem and downgraded to a 2.6.38
> kernel. By the way, that works for me too for the time being.
> 
> Best Regards.
> 
> Jan Stilow

I had similar experience with two servers running on 2.6.39 - the 
performance was terrible, after downgrade to 2.6.38 the speed is OK again.

Best regards

Lubos Kolouch


  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-12  7:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-11  0:18 extremely slow syncing on btrfs with 2.6.39.1 Kok, Auke-jan H
2011-07-12  7:18 ` Jan Stilow
2011-07-12  7:52   ` Lubos Kolouch [this message]
2011-07-12  8:44     ` Li Zefan
2011-07-27  5:37       ` Lubos Kolouch

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='ivgugm$6i2$1@dough.gmane.org' \
    --to=lubos.kolouch@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).