From: Thomas Kaehn <tk@westend.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Strange delete performance using XFS
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 15:05:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070404130535.GE18320@mail3b.westend.com> (raw)
Hi,
I've got a strange problem on one machine using XFS. Deleting large
directories (containing about 100000 files, 20k each) using "rm -rf"
lasts nearly as long as creating the the files using a bash loop.
The machine is running Debian Sarge with a vanilla 2.6.20.3 kernel.
CPU: Dual Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz
RAM: 4 GB
RAID10: 4x 320 GB disks connected to 3ware 9550SXU-8LP
(Firmware Version = FE9X 3.08.00.004)
The XFS was first created using default options and later on with
"-d su=64k,sw=2 -l su=64k" which improved overall performance
but not delete performance.
Has anyone realized similar effects? On a different server (Dell 6850)
the directory can be deleted within seconds. What could be the reason
for the huge difference in delete performance?
Please see below for "time" output.
| # time for i in `seq 1 100000`; do dd if=/dev/zero of=$i bs=1k count=20 >/dev/null 2>&1; done
|
| real 6m6.814s
| user 0m30.290s
| sys 2m42.562s
| # time rm -rf y
|
| real 5m18.034s
| user 0m0.036s
| sys 0m8.169s
In contrast to this the result on the Dell machine looks more
reasonable:
| # time for i in `seq 1 100000`; do dd if=/dev/zero of=$i bs=1k count=20 >/dev/null 2>&1; done
|
| real 9m26.658s
| user 0m24.134s
| sys 3m3.623s
| # time rm -rf x
|
| real 0m10.254s
| user 0m0.124s
| sys 0m10.105s
Ciao,
Thomas
PS: Using JFS and ext3 it is also possible to delete the above directory
in a couple of seconds. Only XFS seems problematic in this regard on
this system.
--
Thomas Kähn WESTEND GmbH | Internet-Business-Provider
Technik CISCO Systems Partner - Authorized Reseller
Im Süsterfeld 6 Tel 0241/701333-18
tk@westend.com D-52072 Aachen Fax 0241/911879
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Die Gesellschaft ist eingetragen im Handelsregister Aachen unter HRB 7608
Geschäftsführer: Thomas Neugebauer, Thomas Heller, Michael Kolb
next reply other threads:[~2007-04-04 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-04 13:05 Thomas Kaehn [this message]
2007-04-04 13:29 ` Strange delete performance using XFS Justin Piszcz
2007-04-04 13:47 ` Thomas Kaehn
2007-04-04 13:51 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-04 13:57 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-04 13:57 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-04 14:12 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-04 14:21 ` Thomas Kaehn
2007-04-04 14:24 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-04 14:35 ` Thomas Kaehn
2007-04-04 20:45 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-04 14:13 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-05 8:17 ` Thomas Kaehn
2007-04-04 18:36 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-05 7:37 ` Thomas Kaehn
2007-04-04 15:45 ` Chris Wedgwood
2007-04-05 7:28 ` Thomas Kaehn
2007-04-05 9:03 ` Thomas Kaehn
2007-04-05 10:21 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-05 10:50 ` Thomas Kaehn
2007-04-05 11:11 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-04-05 15:29 ` Chris Wedgwood
2007-04-06 19:02 ` Peter Grandi
2007-04-11 9:36 ` Thomas Kaehn
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=20070404130535.GE18320@mail3b.westend.com \
--to=tk@westend.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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