From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>
Cc: Valerie Clement <valerie.clement@bull.net>,
Alex Tomas <alex@clusterfs.com>,
ext4 development <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Bad performance results with the latest git patches
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:44:20 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46E518FC.2010405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070907213716.GH5377@schatzie.adilger.int>
Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Sep 07, 2007 14:24 +0200, Valerie Clement wrote:
>> running ffsb tests (large files creation) on my system with the latest
>> ext4 git patches against a 2.6.23-rc4 kernel, I've got very bad
>> performance results: the I/O throughput measured on an ext4 filesystem
>> is ten times lower than those measured on an XFS filesystem on the same
>> machine.
>> I have mounted the ext4 filesytem with mballoc, delalloc and
>> data=writeback options.
>>
>> dmesg output shows plenty of error messages like this:
>>
>> EXT4-fs error (device sdc): ext4_ext_search_right: bad header in inode
>> #3745797: unexpected eh_depth - magic f30a, entries 81, max 84(0), depth
>> 0(1)
>
> It is the message that likely slows down the filesystem.
>
>> If I removed the second call to ext4_ext_check_header() in the
>> ext4_ext_search_right() function, the problem disappears, no more error
>> messages and better throughput values close to those measured on the XFS
>> filesystem.
>> It seems that the depth value passed in argument is buggy.
>>
>> In a previous line,
>> while (++depth < path->p_depth) {
>>
>> the depth value is incremented even if we don't enter the loop. Is it
>> the problem ?
>
> No, because the "depth" value is not used after the loop is done. The
> problem is really that the depth decreases down the tree instead of
> increasing. This is not immediately seen during testing because mballoc
> does a good job of merging extents and files have to be very fragmented
> (heavy multi-threaded IO) and/or very large (>512MB) before the index
> grows outside the inode (depth > 0).
>
> The problem was in the recently-added "extent sanity checks", and has
> also been fixed:
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Tomas <alex@clusterfs.com>
> Signed-off-by: Johann Lombardi <johann@clusterfs.com>
>
> diff -u linux-2.6.18.8/fs/ext3/extents.c linux-2.6.18.8/fs/ext3/extents.c
> --- linux-2.6.18.8/fs/ext3/extents.c 2007-06-20 18:54:00.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.18.8/fs/ext3/extents.c 2007-06-20 18:54:00.000000000 +0200
> @@ -1069,7 +1069,7 @@ ext3_ext_search_right(struct inode *inode,
> if (bh == NULL)
> return -EIO;
> eh = ext_block_hdr(bh);
> - if (ext3_ext_check_header(inode, eh, depth)) {
> + if (ext3_ext_check_header(inode, eh, path->p_depth - depth)) {
> brelse(bh);
> return -EIO;
> }
>
s/ext3/ext4 :)
I will merge it with new-extent-function.patch. Will also add the above signed-off-by:
-aneesh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-10 10:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-07 12:24 Bad performance results with the latest git patches Valerie Clement
2007-09-07 21:37 ` Andreas Dilger
2007-09-10 10:14 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2007-09-10 11:39 ` Valerie Clement
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=46E518FC.2010405@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=adilger@clusterfs.com \
--cc=alex@clusterfs.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=valerie.clement@bull.net \
/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).