From: Keith Mannthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Cc: Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@gmail.com>,
linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Ext4 performance regression: Post 2.6.30
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:02:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1270072944.7193.29.camel@keith-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BB2CA41.5050406@redhat.com>
On Tue, 2010-03-30 at 23:06 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Keith Mannthey wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 11:10 -0400, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Keith Mannthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> After 2.6.30 I am seeing large performance regressions on a raid setup.
> >>> I am working to publish a larger amount of data but I wanted to get some
> >>> quick data out about what I am seeing.
> >>>
> >> Is mdraid involved?
> >>
> >> They added barrier support for some configs after 2.6.30 I believe.
> >> It can cause a drastic perf change, but it increases reliability and
> >> is "correct".
> >
> > lvm and device mapper are is involved. The git bisect just took me to:
> >
> > 374bf7e7f6cc38b0483351a2029a97910eadde1b is first bad commit
> > commit 374bf7e7f6cc38b0483351a2029a97910eadde1b
> > Author: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
> > Date: Mon Jun 22 10:12:22 2009 +0100
> >
> > dm: stripe support flush
> >
> > Flush support for the stripe target.
> >
> > This sets ti->num_flush_requests to the number of stripes and
> > remaps individual flush requests to the appropriate stripe devices.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
> >
> > :040000 040000 542f4b9b442d1371c6534f333b7e00714ef98609 d490479b660139fc1b6b0ecd17bb58c9e00e597e M drivers
> >
> >
> > This may be correct behavior but the performance penalty in this test
> > case is pretty high.
> >
> > I am going to move back to current kernels and starting looking into
> > ext4/dm flushing.
>
> It would probably be interesting to do a mount -o nobarrier to see if
> that makes the regression go away.
-o nobarrier takes the regression away with 2.6.34-rc3:
Default mount: ~27500
-o nobarrier: ~12500
Barriers on this setup cost ALOT during writes.
Interestingly as well the "mailserver" workload regression is also
removed by mounting with "-o nobarrier".
I am going to see what impact is seen on a single disk setup.
Thanks,
Keith Mannthey
LTC FS-Dev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-31 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-29 6:25 Ext4 performance regression: Post 2.6.30 Keith Mannthey
2010-03-29 15:10 ` Greg Freemyer
2010-03-31 1:56 ` Keith Mannthey
2010-03-31 4:06 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-03-31 22:02 ` Keith Mannthey [this message]
2010-03-31 22:06 ` Greg Freemyer
2010-03-31 22:14 ` Keith Mannthey
2010-03-31 22:55 ` Greg Freemyer
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=1270072944.7193.29.camel@keith-laptop \
--to=kmannth@us.ibm.com \
--cc=greg.freemyer@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
/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).