From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Peter Grandi <pg@lxra2.to.sabi.co.UK>
Cc: Linux RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>, Linux fs XFS <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: raid10n2/xfs setup guidance on write-cache/barrier
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 10:00:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120318140051.GA2594@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20325.50714.237894.328039@tree.ty.sabi.co.UK>
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 11:25:14AM +0000, Peter Grandi wrote:
> > ?There have been decent but no major improvements in XFS metadata
> > *performance*, but weaker implicit *semantics* have been made an
> > option, and these have a different safety/performance tradeoff
> > (less implicit safety, somewhat more performance), not "just"
> > better performance.?
>
> I have left implicit a point that perhaps should be explicit: I
> think that XFS metadata performance before 'delaylog' was pretty
> good, and that it has remained pretty good with 'delaylog'.
For many workloads it absolutely wasn't.
> People who complained about slow metadata performance with XFS
> before 'delaylog' were in effect complaining that XFS was
> implementing overly (in some sense) safe metadata semantics, and
> in effect were demanding less (implicit) safety, without
> probably realizing they were asking for that.
No, they weren't, and as with most posts to the XFS and RAID lists
you are completely off the track.
Plese read through Documentation/filesystems/xfs-delayed-logging-design.txt
and if you have any actual technical questions that you don't understand
feel free to come back and ask.
But please stop giving advise taken out of the thin air to people on the
lists that might actually believe whatever madness you just dreamed up.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-18 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAA8mOyDKrWg0QUEHxcD4ocXXD42nJu0TG+sXjC4j2RsigHTcmw@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <4F61803A.60009@hardwarefreak.com>
[not found] ` <CAA8mOyCzs36YD_QUMq25HQf8zuq1=tmSTPjYdoFJwy2Oq9sLmw@mail.gmail.com>
2012-03-15 14:07 ` raid10n2/xfs setup guidance on write-cache/barrier Peter Grandi
2012-03-15 15:25 ` keld
2012-03-15 16:52 ` Jessie Evangelista
2012-03-15 17:15 ` keld
2012-03-15 17:40 ` keld
2012-03-15 16:18 ` Jessie Evangelista
2012-03-15 23:00 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-16 3:36 ` Jessie Evangelista
2012-03-16 11:06 ` Michael Monnerie
2012-03-16 12:21 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-16 17:15 ` Brian Candler
2012-03-17 15:35 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-17 21:39 ` raid10n2/xfs setup guidance on write-cache/barrier (GiB alignment) Zdenek Kaspar
2012-03-18 0:08 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-26 19:50 ` raid10n2/xfs setup guidance on write-cache/barrier Martin Steigerwald
2012-03-17 4:21 ` NOW:Peter goading Dave over delaylog - WAS: " Stan Hoeppner
2012-03-17 22:34 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-18 2:09 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-18 11:25 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-18 14:00 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2012-03-18 19:17 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-19 9:07 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-03-20 12:34 ` Jessie Evangelista
2012-03-18 18:08 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-03-22 21:26 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-23 5:10 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-03-23 22:48 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-03-24 1:27 ` Peter Grandi
2012-03-24 16:27 ` GNU 'tar', Schilling's 'tar', write-cache/barrier Peter Grandi
2012-03-24 17:11 ` Brian Candler
2012-03-24 18:35 ` Peter Grandi
[not found] ` <4F633121.10800@hardwarefreak.com>
[not found] ` <CAKuK5J3GHgWcnYLqwRV8s_wMjO2nBVf7h=yONtn90kPn9A_3Gg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAKuK5J11JTdwZSBWj7DH7c+hE--MVNQVVrcKXaV2AO-wEpWBog@mail.gmail.com>
2012-03-16 19:28 ` raid10n2/xfs setup guidance on write-cache/barrier Peter Grandi
2012-03-17 0:02 ` Stan Hoeppner
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=20120318140051.GA2594@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pg@lxra2.to.sabi.co.UK \
--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