From: Stian Jordet <liste@jordet.net>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Extreme slowness with xfs [WAS: Re: Slowness with new pc]
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:03:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1227647010.7992.34.camel@chevrolet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <492B5684.2080107@sandeen.net>
ma., 24.11.2008 kl. 19.36 -0600, skrev Eric Sandeen:
> I don't know if the storage you're on passes barriers or not, but xfs
> has barriers on by default, while ext3 does not. ext3 will still
> likely
> win the "untar a kernel" race, but for a fairer test, make the barrier
> settings consistent between the two.
As I wrote earlier, the point wasn't to find the fastest fs. That's not
what I'm looking for. I just want xfs to perform at least as good on my
new workstation as it did on my six years old other workstation.
Which disabling barriers helped (notice the rm -rf with barriers...
nobarrier is almost 200 times faster, 10 times faster on the unpacking):
With barrier:
time bash -c 'tar xjf linux-2.6.27.7.tar.bz2 ; sync'
real 9m57.320s
user 0m16.253s
sys 0m2.692s
time bash -c 'rm -rf linux-2.6.27.7 ; sync'
real 4m46.130s
user 0m0.032s
sys 0m1.300s
No barrier:
bash -c 'tar xjf linux-2.6.27.7.tar.bz2 ; sync'
real 0m57.028s
user 0m15.157s
sys 0m2.632s
time bash -c 'rm -rf linux-2.6.27.7 ; sync'
real 0m1.502s
user 0m0.032s
sys 0m1.436s
### Ext3
time bash -c 'tar xjf linux-2.6.27.7.tar.bz2 ; sync'
real 0m18.663s
user 0m14.693s
sys 0m2.828s
time bash -c 'rm -r linux-2.6.27.7 ; sync'
real 0m0.635s
user 0m0.028s
sys 0m0.564s
Altough I find it weird that both Michael and Justin does it faster on a
single disk than I do on my beefy hardware raid. But either way, finally
the system works ok, so I'm happy :) Ohh, wait. Justin is using just
the .tar... Well, that didn't really help that much here:
time bash -c 'tar xf linux-2.6.27.7.tar ; sync'
real 0m43.703s
user 0m0.256s
sys 0m3.312s
Thanks!
Regards,
Stian
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-25 21:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-15 14:44 Slowness with new pc Stian Jordet
2008-11-18 13:51 ` Sergio Luis
2008-11-23 21:48 ` Extreme slowness with xfs [WAS: Re: Slowness with new pc] Stian Jordet
2008-11-23 22:25 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-11-24 0:19 ` Stian Jordet
2008-11-24 9:50 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-11-24 23:36 ` Stian Jordet
2008-11-24 23:52 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-11-25 0:09 ` Sven-Haegar Koch
2008-11-25 20:44 ` Stian Jordet
2008-11-25 21:22 ` Eric Sandeen
2008-11-25 21:51 ` Stian Jordet
2008-11-25 1:36 ` Eric Sandeen
2008-11-25 9:56 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-11-25 10:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-11-25 10:46 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-11-25 18:39 ` Michael Tokarev
2008-11-25 21:03 ` Stian Jordet [this message]
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=1227647010.7992.34.camel@chevrolet \
--to=liste@jordet.net \
--cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--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