From: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfs_fsr question for improvement
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 00:39:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201005110039.18561@zmi.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100503121716.GF2591@dastard>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1604 bytes --]
On Montag, 3. Mai 2010 Dave Chinner wrote:
> Many have. Find and tar have resisted attempts to optimise them over
> the years, so stuff like this:
>
> http://oss.oracle.com/~mason/acp/
> grows on the interwebs all over the place... ;)
Uh, that makes a nice 3818 IOPS with 161MB/s:
xvdb 3818,16 0,80 161449,90 35,13 84,57 10,75
2,30 0,26 99,88
And even saw >4kIOPS an 180MB/s. Nice.
The tool gave me an idea:
lvchange -r 1024 /dev/all_my_lvm_stores
And this boots copy performance a lot: With the default "-r 128" I had
around 10-30MB/s, now 30-100MB/s. Of course this depends on the type of
access and so on, but at least during moving back all the data from the
backup lvm to the re-created original lvm it's a drastic speedup.
> > # time find /mountpoint/ -inum 107901420
> > real 0m30.113s
> > user 0m0.540s
> > sys 0m9.813s
> >
> > Caching helps the 2nd time :-)
>
> That still seems rather slow traversing 750,000 cached directory
> entries. My laptop (1.3GHz CULV core2 CPU) does 465,000 directory
> entries in:
>
> $ time sudo find / -mount -inum 123809285
>
> real 0m2.196s
> user 0m0.384s
> sys 0m1.464s
So why was it so slow here?
As soon as moving back all data is finished, I can retry if search speed
increased.
--
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc
it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31
// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-10 22:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-16 8:43 xfs_fsr question for improvement Michael Monnerie
2010-04-16 10:43 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-04-17 1:24 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-17 7:13 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-04-25 11:17 ` Peter Grandi
2010-04-25 13:02 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-04-25 21:04 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-04-25 21:44 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-04-26 0:02 ` Linda Walsh
2010-05-03 6:49 ` Michael Monnerie
2010-05-03 7:41 ` Michael Monnerie
2010-05-03 12:17 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-10 22:39 ` Michael Monnerie [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-04-26 20:58 Richard Scobie
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=201005110039.18561@zmi.at \
--to=michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at \
--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