From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p591TBaD129589 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 20:29:11 -0500 Received: from ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 9CEB114E9735 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 18:29:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.145]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id uxRDgd56Y4KMJWc6 for ; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 18:29:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 11:29:07 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: Small files perform much faster on newly formatted fs? Message-ID: <20110609012907.GR32466@dastard> References: <20110607163742.GH28625@pyre.virge.net> <201106080911.11286@zmi.at> <20110608122638.GQ28625@pyre.virge.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110608122638.GQ28625@pyre.virge.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Norbert Veber Cc: Michael Monnerie , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 08:26:38AM -0400, Norbert Veber wrote: > On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 09:11:10AM +0200, Michael Monnerie wrote: > > On Dienstag, 7. Juni 2011 Norbert Veber wrote: > > > 20 seconds vs 3+ minutes?! The only difference I can see is > > > lazy-count=1 and a larger agcount. Sunit and swidth were also set > > > automatically by mkfs this time. > > > > Then retry mounting the old fs with sunit= and swidth= parameters. Are > > they on the same disks? What are your disks (number, kind)? > > Yes its already mounted this way as I mentioned in my original message: > /dev/mapper/vg0-shared on /shared type xfs (rw,noatime,sunit=128,swidth=256) Those mount options are ignored if the filesystem doesn't have the superblock feature bit set for aligned allocations. A filesystem with 0/0 for sunit/swidth does not have the superblock bit set.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs