* Bad performance results with the latest git patches
@ 2007-09-07 12:24 Valerie Clement
2007-09-07 21:37 ` Andreas Dilger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Valerie Clement @ 2007-09-07 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Tomas; +Cc: ext4 development
Hi Alex,
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)
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)
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)
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)
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 ?
Could you check this?
Thanks,
Valérie
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: Bad performance results with the latest git patches
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
2007-09-10 11:39 ` Valerie Clement
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Dilger @ 2007-09-07 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valerie Clement; +Cc: Alex Tomas, ext4 development
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;
}
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Software Engineer
Cluster File Systems, Inc.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: Bad performance results with the latest git patches
2007-09-07 21:37 ` Andreas Dilger
@ 2007-09-10 10:14 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2007-09-10 11:39 ` Valerie Clement
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Aneesh Kumar K.V @ 2007-09-10 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Dilger; +Cc: Valerie Clement, Alex Tomas, ext4 development
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: Bad performance results with the latest git patches
2007-09-07 21:37 ` Andreas Dilger
2007-09-10 10:14 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
@ 2007-09-10 11:39 ` Valerie Clement
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Valerie Clement @ 2007-09-10 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Dilger; +Cc: ext4 development
Andreas Dilger wrote:
> 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;
> }
>
Thanks Andreas, I confirm this patch fixes the problem.
Valérie
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-09-10 11:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
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
2007-09-10 11:39 ` Valerie Clement
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).