From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42CB17F54 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 10:08:22 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5EB3AC004 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:08:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 5KUv5mrattXXW0Hg for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:08:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54DB7E70.3060709@sandeen.net> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 10:08:16 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: XFS buffer IO performance is very poor References: In-Reply-To: List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: yy , xfs On 2/11/15 1:39 AM, yy wrote: (In addition to Brian's questions): > XFS format parametes: > > #mkfs.xfs -d su=256k,sw=5 /dev/sdb1 > > #cat /proc/mounts > > /dev/sdb1 /data1 xfs rw,noatime,attr2,delaylog,nobarrier,logbsize=256k,sunit=512,swidth=2560,noquota 0 0 > > #fdisk -ul > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System > /dev/sdb1 128 2929356359 1464678116 83 Linux so 128*512 = 64k; your partition doesn't start on a 256k stripe unit boundary, right? Shouldn't it do so? -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs