From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o8KH3gsF228004 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 12:03:42 -0500 Received: from opencube.bzctoons.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id B85061820792 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 10:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from opencube.bzctoons.net (opencube-2.bzctoons.net [88.191.104.187]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id uDvGmLGqLxSa2aiH for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 10:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (opencube.bzctoons.net.local [127.0.0.1]) by opencube.bzctoons.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1C18909F5 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:04:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from opencube.bzctoons.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (opencube.bzctoons.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 26303-02 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:04:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.16.148] (opencube03.pck.nerim.net [62.212.120.41]) (Authenticated sender: mathieu.avila@opencubetech.com) by opencube.bzctoons.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4C85490A7D for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:04:31 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4C979439.7070906@opencubetech.com> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:04:57 +0200 From: Mathieu AVILA MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Question regarding performance on big files. List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4946455851690389721==" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============4946455851690389721== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060408080804000902080404" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060408080804000902080404 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello XFS team, I have run into trouble with XFS, but excuse me if this question has been asked a dozens times. I'm am filling a very big file on a XFS filesystem on Linux that stands on a software RAID 0. Performance are very good until I get 2 "holes" during which my write stalls for a few seconds. Mkfs parameters: mkxfs.xfs -b size 4096 -s size 4096 -d agcount=2 -i size=2048 The RAID0 is done a 2 SATA disks of 500 GB each. My test is just running "dd" with 8M blocks: dd if=/dev/zero of=/DATA/big (/DATA is the XFS file system) The system is basically a RHEL5 with a 2.6.18 kernel and XFS packages from CentOS. The problem happens 2 times: one time around 210 GB and the second time around 688 GB (hole in performance and response time is bigger the second time -- around 20 seconds) Do you have any clue ? Do my mkfs parameters make sense ? The goal here is really to have something that is able to store big files at a constant throughput -- the test is done on purpose. -- *Mathieu Avila* IT & Integration Engineer mathieu.avila@opencubetech.com OpenCube Technologies http://www.opencubetech.com Parc Technologique du Canal, 9 avenue de l'Europe 31520 Ramonville St Agne - FRANCE Tel. : +33 (0) 561 285 606 - Fax : +33 (0) 561 285 635 --------------060408080804000902080404 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello XFS team,

I have run into trouble with XFS, but excuse me if this question has been asked a dozens times.

I'm am filling a very big file on a XFS filesystem on Linux that stands on a software RAID 0. Performance are very good until I get 2 "holes" during which my write stalls for a few seconds.
Mkfs parameters:
mkxfs.xfs -b size 4096 -s size 4096 -d agcount=2 -i size=2048
The RAID0 is done a 2 SATA disks of 500 GB each.

My test is just running "dd" with 8M blocks:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/DATA/big
(/DATA is the XFS file system)

The system is basically a RHEL5 with a 2.6.18 kernel and XFS packages from CentOS.

The problem happens 2 times: one time around 210 GB and the second time around 688 GB (hole in performance and response time is bigger the second time -- around 20 seconds)

Do you have any clue ? Do my mkfs parameters make sense ? The goal here is really to have something that is able to store big files at a constant throughput -- the test is done on purpose.

--
Mathieu Avila
IT & Integration Engineer
mathieu.avila@opencubetech.com

OpenCube Technologies http://www.opencubetech.com
Parc Technologique du Canal, 9 avenue de l'Europe
31520 Ramonville St Agne - FRANCE
Tel. : +33 (0) 561 285 606 - Fax : +33 (0) 561 285 635

--------------060408080804000902080404-- --===============4946455851690389721== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs --===============4946455851690389721==--