From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 24 Apr 2008 05:48:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m3OCmWxe020677 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 05:48:34 -0700 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id EB0A8E123B for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 05:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id mZ21GULk1BlVDW3x for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 05:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <481081CE.1080500@sandeen.net> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:49:18 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: XFS drops create/delete files to 6.6% of EXT3 (software raid) and to 0.6% of EXT3 (3ware hardware raid) References: <4810062F.50100@sandeen.net> <20080424053358.GW103491721@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Michael Darling Cc: David Chinner , xfs@oss.sgi.com Michael Darling wrote: > Eric, for the numbers you provided, are you using a single drive, > software raid, or hardware raid? If a hardware raid, is it a 3ware card? it's a simple partition on a sata drive. > I hadn't seen the nobarrier mount option before. Using that changes > sequential creates from about 190/second to about 2500/second, and > changes sequential deletes from about 170/second to about 3700/second. I wasn't recommending, necessarily, that you use it, but was just looking for bottlenecks... > I don't yet have a BBU for the 3ware card, but would certainly get one > if we go with the 3ware card before we start putting real data on the > raid. Am I right that with a BBU unit and a battery backup for the > server as a whole, that nobarrier would be safe to use? > > Not using nobarrier, but using logbsize 256k changes sequential creates > from about 190/second to about 270/second. So, it's an improvement, but > no where near where a software raid performs (1600/second) or where the > hardware raid performs with nobarrier. Default mkfs & mount w/ 256k logbufs: xfs,256k logbuf: 1353/s > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:33 AM, David Chinner > wrote: > > So I played with this a little on 2.6.25, on plain partitions. > > > > I saw similar numbers; for example, sequential creates: > > > > ext3: 23698/s > > xfs: 319/s > > xfs,nobarrier: 4478/s > > And with logbsize=256k? > > Cheers, > > Dave.