From: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
To: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/7] XFS: dynamic busy extent tracking
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:11:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200810100911.19345.Martin@lichtvoll.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081009223328.GI9597@disturbed>
Am Freitag 10 Oktober 2008 schrieben Sie:
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 08:17:32PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
[...]
> > A student in the Linux Performance Tuning course I hold this week
> > compared this with ext3, even with the improved mkfs.xfs options (but
> > without lazy-count=1, cause mkfs.xfs from Debian Etch is too old) and
> > even with noop as IO scheduler. AFAIR XFS took roughly 3-4 times as
> > long as Ext3, I did not note the exact numbers. This was with 2.6.25.
> > I can repeat the test locally with 2.6.26.5 if wanted.
>
> Yes, that's par for the course. XFS journals transactions almost
> immediately, whereas ext3 gathers lots of changees in memory and
> checkpoints infrequently. Hence XFS writes a lot more to the
> journal and is hence slower. The dynamic extent tracking is a
> necessary step to moving the XFS journalling to a more
> checkpoint-like setup which would perform much less journal
> I/O and hence run substantially faster....
>
> See the asynchronous transaction aggregation section here:
>
> http://xfs.org/index.php/Improving_Metadata_Performance_By_Reducing_Jou
>rnal_Overhead
Thanks for the info Dave.
I still have your three mails about future improvements on XFS on my
reading list. I just read a bit of the first one.
Ciao,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-10 7:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-07 22:09 [RFC, PATCH 0/7] XFS: dynamic busy extent tracking Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 1/7] XFS: rename xfs_get_perag Dave Chinner
2008-10-08 18:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 2/7] XFS: replace fixed size busy extent array with an rbtree Dave Chinner
2008-10-08 18:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-10-09 0:06 ` Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 3/7] XFS: Don't immediately reallocate busy extents Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 4/7] XFS: Don't use log forces when busy extents are allocated Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 5/7] XFS: Do not classify freed allocation btree blocks as busy Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 6/7] XFS: Avoid busy extent ranges rather than the entire extent Dave Chinner
2008-10-07 22:09 ` [PATCH 7/7] XFS: Simplify transaction busy extent tracking Dave Chinner
2008-10-09 18:17 ` [RFC, PATCH 0/7] XFS: dynamic " Martin Steigerwald
2008-10-09 22:33 ` Dave Chinner
2008-10-10 7:11 ` Martin Steigerwald [this message]
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=200810100911.19345.Martin@lichtvoll.de \
--to=martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-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