From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o9OILZNv146973 for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 13:21:35 -0500 Received: from mailsrv14.zmi.at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id EDF734EC5F6 for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 11:22:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailsrv14.zmi.at (mailsrv1.zmi.at [212.69.164.54]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id y8axtOaXuCDXWtrc for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 11:22:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Monnerie Subject: Re: XFS use within multi-threaded apps Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 20:22:46 +0200 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201010242022.46693@zmi.at> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5404774446461160786==" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com Cc: Angelo McComis --===============5404774446461160786== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2290361.hddsnaoA1n"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --nextPart2290361.hddsnaoA1n Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Samstag, 23. Oktober 2010 Angelo McComis wrote: > They quoted having 10+TB databases running OLTP on EXT3 with > 4-5GB/sec sustained throughput (not XFS). Which servers and storage are these? This is nothing you can do with=20 "normal" storages. Using 8Gb/s Fibre Channel gives 1GB/s, if you can do=20 full speed I/O. So you'd need at least 5 parallel Fibre Channel storages=20 running without any overhead. Also, a single server can't do that high=20 rates, so there must be several front-end servers. That again means=20 their database must be especially organised for that type of load=20 (shared nothing or so). On the other hand, if they have these performance numbers on 100 shared=20 serves, it only needs 51MB/s per server of I/O to get 5GB/s total=20 throughput. So that is a number without a lot of meaning, as long as you=20 don't know which hardware is used. And: how high would be their throughput when using XFS instead EXT3? ;-) One question comes to my mind: if they do direct I/O, would there still=20 be a lot of difference between XFS and EXT3, performance wise? And how many companies run around telling which filesystem they use for=20 their performance critical business application? Normally they do this=20 only for marketing, so they get paid or special prices if they say "with=20 this product we are sooo happy". =2D-=20 mit freundlichen Gr=C3=BCssen, Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc it-management Internet Services http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee] Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31 ****** Radiointerview zum Thema Spam ****** http://www.it-podcast.at/archiv.html#podcast-100716 // Wir haben im Moment zwei H=C3=A4user zu verkaufen: // http://zmi.at/langegg/ // http://zmi.at/haus2009/ --nextPart2290361.hddsnaoA1n Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkzEeXYACgkQzhSR9xwSCbSVUACfYnRioogg1CHego2mFUW9mf8h nJgAn0qqjq4m2ruiJE3ZRXYabTVP37He =+trC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2290361.hddsnaoA1n-- --===============5404774446461160786== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs --===============5404774446461160786==--