public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Spelic <spelic@shiftmail.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Xfs delaylog hanged up
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 15:20:59 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101126042059.GG12187@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CEEF275.7090800@shiftmail.org>

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 12:34:13AM +0100, Spelic wrote:
> On 11/23/2010 09:46 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >...
> >I note that the load is
> >generating close to 10,000 iops on my test system, so it may very
> >well be triggering load related problems in your raid controller...
> 
> Dave thanks for all explanations on the BBWC,
> 
> I wanted to ask how can you measure that it's 10,000 IOPS with that
> workload. Is it by iostat -x ?

http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129013629728687&w=2

> but only for a few shots of iostat, not for the whole run of the
> "benchmark". Do you mean you have 10000 averaged over the whole
> benchmark?

It peaked at over 10,000 iops, lowest rate was ~4000iops and the
average would have been around 7000iops.

> Also I'm curious, do you remember how much time does it take to
> complete one run (10 parallel tar unpacks) on your 12-disk raid0 +
> BBWC?

33 seconds, with it being limited by the decompression rate (i.e. CPU
bound).

> Probably a better test would excluding the unbzip2 part from the
> benchmark, like the following but it probably won't make more than
> 10sec difference:
> 
> /perftest/xfs# bzcat linux-2.6.37-rc2.tar.bz2 > linux-2.6.37-rc2.tar
> /perftest/xfs# mkdir dir{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}
> /perftest/xfs# for i in {1..10} ; do time tar -xf
> linux-2.6.37-rc2.tar -C dir$i & done ; echo waiting now ; time wait;
> echo syncing now ; time sync

I'm currently running qa test right now on my test machine, so I
don't have a direct comparison with the above number for you.

However, my workstation has a pair of 120GB sandforce 1200 SSDs in
RAID0 running 2.6.37-rc1 w/ delaylog and the results are 40s for the
compressed tarball and 16s for the uncompressed tarball.

The uncompressed tarball run had lower IOPS and much higher
bandwidth as much more merging in the IO elevators was being done
compared to the compressed tarball...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2010-11-26  4:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-22 19:27 Xfs delaylog hanged up Spelic
2010-11-22 23:29 ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-23 11:17   ` Spelic
2010-11-23 13:28     ` Spelic
2010-11-23 20:46     ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-23 22:14       ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-11-24  0:20         ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-24 13:12           ` Spelic
2010-11-24 21:50             ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-23 22:48       ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-11-24  0:36         ` Spelic
2010-11-24  1:40           ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-11-24  6:18           ` Michael Monnerie
2010-11-24  7:44           ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-11-24  0:58       ` Spelic
2010-11-24  5:44         ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-25 23:34       ` Spelic
2010-11-26  4:20         ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2010-11-24 22:52 ` Spelic
2010-11-26 22:43   ` Spelic
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-11-24  4:03 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=20101126042059.GG12187@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=spelic@shiftmail.org \
    --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