From: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
To: Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.com.au>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ext4, barrier, md/RAID1 and write cache
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 18:25:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201205071825.38415.Martin@lichtvoll.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FA7A83E.6010801@pocock.com.au>
Am Montag, 7. Mai 2012 schrieb Daniel Pocock:
> I've been having some NFS performance issues, and have been
> experimenting with the server filesystem (ext4) to see if that is a
> factor.
Which NFS version is this?
> The setup is like this:
>
> (Debian 6, kernel 2.6.39)
> 2x SATA drive (NCQ, 32MB cache, no hardware RAID)
> md RAID1
> LVM
> ext4
>
> a) If I use data=ordered,barrier=1 and `hdparm -W 1' on the drive, I
> observe write performance over NFS of 1MB/sec (unpacking a big source
> tarball)
Is this a realistic workload scenario for production use?
> b) If I use data=writeback,barrier=0 and `hdparm -W 1' on the drive, I
> observe write performance over NFS of 10MB/sec
>
> c) If I just use the async option on NFS, I observe up to 30MB/sec
>
> I believe (b) and (c) are not considered safe against filesystem
> corruption, so I can't use them in practice.
Partly.
b) can harm filesystem consistency unless you disable write cache on the
disks
c) won´t harm local filesystem consistency, but should the nfs server break
down all data that the NFS clients sent to the server for writing which is
not written yet is gone.
> - or must I just use option (b) but make it safer with battery-backed
> write cache?
If you want performance and safety that is the best option from the ones
you mentioned, if the workload is really I/O bound on the local filesystem.
Of course you can try the usual tricks like noatime, remove rsize and
wsize options on the NFS client if they have a new enough kernel (they
autotune to much higher than the often recommended 8192 or 32768 bytes,
look at /proc/mounts), put ext4 journal onto an extra disk to reduce head
seeks, check whether enough NFS server threads are running, try a different
filesystem and so on.
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-07 16:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-07 10:47 ext4, barrier, md/RAID1 and write cache Daniel Pocock
2012-05-07 16:25 ` Martin Steigerwald [this message]
2012-05-07 16:44 ` Daniel Pocock
2012-05-07 16:54 ` Andreas Dilger
2012-05-07 17:28 ` Daniel Pocock
2012-05-07 18:59 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-05-07 20:56 ` Daniel Pocock
2012-05-07 22:24 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-05-07 23:23 ` Daniel Pocock
2012-05-08 14:55 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-05-08 15:28 ` Daniel Pocock
2012-05-08 17:02 ` Andreas Dilger
2012-05-09 7:30 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-05-09 9:34 ` Martin Steigerwald
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=201205071825.38415.Martin@lichtvoll.de \
--to=martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=daniel@pocock.com.au \
--cc=linux-ext4@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