From: Norbert Veber <nveber@pyre.virge.net>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Small files perform much faster on newly formatted fs?
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 09:48:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110609134811.GI28625@pyre.virge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110609012907.GR32466@dastard>
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 11:29:07AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> 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....
Oh man! I thought I saw some improvement with iometer benchmarks before
and after the mount options, but I dont see any significant difference
while timing the untar and rm -rf I've been doing.
All the documentation I came across including the man page and XFS faq
entry imply that the mount options can be used to perform alignment..
"XFS allows to optimize for a given RAID stripe unit (stripe size) and
stripe width (number of data disks) via mount options."
http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_How_to_calculate_the_correct_sunit.2Cswidth_values_for_optimal_performance
"While the stripe unit and stripe width cannot be changed after an XFS
file system has been created, they can be overridden at mount time with
the sunit/swidth options, similar to ones used by mkfs.xfs."
https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/RAID_setup#XFS
In these kinds of cases maybe there should be an error logged instead of
just silently ignoring them?
Is there any way to change the superblock? Eg. soething like the ext*
command:
tune2fs -E stride=n,stripe-width=m /dev/xxx
Thanks,
Norbert
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-09 13:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-07 16:37 Small files perform much faster on newly formatted fs? Norbert Veber
2011-06-08 7:11 ` Michael Monnerie
2011-06-08 12:26 ` Norbert Veber
2011-06-08 13:47 ` Michael Monnerie
2011-06-08 18:58 ` Norbert Veber
2011-06-09 5:44 ` Michael Monnerie
2011-06-08 20:52 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-06-08 21:16 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-06-09 1:29 ` Dave Chinner
2011-06-09 8:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-09 13:48 ` Norbert Veber [this message]
2011-06-09 16:30 ` Michael Monnerie
2011-06-09 20:30 ` Norbert Veber
2011-06-09 21:17 ` Dave Chinner
2011-06-10 0:54 ` Norbert Veber
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=20110609134811.GI28625@pyre.virge.net \
--to=nveber@pyre.virge.net \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=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