From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Performance problem - reads slower than writes
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 09:52:05 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120131145205.GA6607@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120131103126.GA46170@nsrc.org>
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:31:26AM +0000, Brian Candler wrote:
> - seek to inode (if the inode block isn't already in cache)
> - seek to extents table (if all extents don't fit in the inode)
> - seek(s) to the file contents, depending on how they're fragmented.
>
> I am currently seeing somewhere between 7 and 8 seeks per file read, and
> this just doesn't seem right to me.
You don't just read a single file at a time but multiple ones, don't
you?
Try playing with the following tweaks to get larger I/O to the disk:
a) make sure you use the noop or deadline elevators
b) increase /sys/block/sdX/queue/max_sectors_kb from its low default
c) dramatically increase /sys/devices/virtual/bdi/<major>:<minor>/read_ahead_kb
> OK. I saw "df -i" reporting a stupid number of available inodes, over 500
> million, so I decided to reduce it to 100 million. But df -k didn't show
> any corresponding increase in disk space, so I'm guessing in xfs these are
> allocated on-demand, and the inode limit doesn't really matter?
Exactly, the number displayed is the upper bound.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-31 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-30 22:00 Performance problem - reads slower than writes Brian Candler
2012-01-31 2:05 ` Dave Chinner
2012-01-31 10:31 ` Brian Candler
2012-01-31 14:16 ` Brian Candler
2012-01-31 20:25 ` Dave Chinner
2012-02-01 7:29 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-02-03 18:47 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-03 19:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-02-03 21:01 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-03 21:17 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-05 22:50 ` Dave Chinner
2012-02-05 22:43 ` Dave Chinner
2012-01-31 14:52 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2012-01-31 21:52 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-01 0:50 ` Raghavendra D Prabhu
2012-02-01 3:59 ` Dave Chinner
2012-02-03 11:54 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-03 19:42 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-02-03 22:10 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-04 9:59 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-02-04 11:24 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-04 12:49 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-02-04 20:04 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-04 20:44 ` Joe Landman
2012-02-06 10:40 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-07 17:30 ` Brian Candler
2012-02-05 5:16 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-02-05 9:05 ` Brian Candler
2012-01-31 20:06 ` Dave Chinner
2012-01-31 21:35 ` Brian Candler
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=20120131145205.GA6607@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=B.Candler@pobox.com \
--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