From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Peter Grandi <pg@xfs2.to.sabi.co.UK>
Cc: Linux XFS <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: avoid mbox file fragmentation
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 13:00:09 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101021020009.GG12506@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19646.55189.843933.481529@tree.ty.sabi.co.uk>
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:50:45PM +0100, Peter Grandi wrote:
> However, I am a fan of having *default* physical preallocation,
> because as a rule one can trade off space for speed nowadays, and
> padding files with "future growth" tails is fairly cheap, and one
> could modify the filesystem code or 'fsck' to reclaim unused space
> in "future grown" tails.
When writing lots of small files (e.g. unpacking a kernel tarball),
leaving space at the file tail due to preallocation (that will never
get used) means that the file data is now sparse on disk instead of
packed into adjacent blocks.
The result? Instead of the elevate merging adjacent file data IOs
into a large IO, they all get issued individually, and the seek
count for IO goes way up. Not truncating away the specualtive
prealocation beyond EOF will cause this, too, and that slows down
such workloads by an order of magnitude....
So, Peter, you don't get the pony because we gave it to someone
else. ;)
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-21 1:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-19 23:04 avoid mbox file fragmentation Stan Hoeppner
2010-10-19 23:42 ` Dave Chinner
2010-10-20 2:36 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-10-20 11:31 ` Peter Grandi
2010-10-20 3:03 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-10-21 1:55 ` Dave Chinner
2010-10-20 11:50 ` Peter Grandi
2010-10-21 2:00 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2010-10-21 16:39 ` Peter Grandi
2010-10-21 20:06 ` Best filesystems ? Andrew Daviel
2010-10-22 2:47 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-10-23 18:13 ` Peter Grandi
2010-10-23 20:16 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-10-26 0:55 ` hank peng
2010-10-26 7:19 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-10-23 21:28 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-10-24 0:17 ` Steve Costaras
2010-10-24 18:27 ` Michael Monnerie
2010-10-24 20:52 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-10-20 11:21 ` avoid mbox file fragmentation Peter Grandi
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=20101021020009.GG12506@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=pg@xfs2.to.sabi.co.UK \
--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