From: Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com>
To: fitzboy <fitzboy@iparadigms.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: tuning for large files in xfs
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 08:51:16 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060523085116.B239136@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <447209A8.2040704@iparadigms.com>; from fitzboy@iparadigms.com on Mon, May 22, 2006 at 11:57:44AM -0700
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 11:57:44AM -0700, fitzboy wrote:
> I've got a very large (2TB) proprietary database that is kept on an XFS
> partition under a debian 2.6.8 kernel. It seemed to work well, until I
> recently did some of my own tests and found that the performance should
> be better then it is...
>
> basically, treat the database as just a bunch of random seeks. The XFS
> partition is sitting on top of a SCSI array (Dell PowerVault) which has
> 13+1 disks in a RAID5, stripe size=64k. I have done a number of tests
> that mimic my app's accesses and realized that I want the inode to be
> as large as possible (which in an intel box is only 2k), played with su
> and sw and got those to 64k and 13... and performance got better.
>
> BUT... here is what I need to understand, the filesize has a drastic
> effect on performance. If I am doing random reads from a 20GB file
> (system only has 2GB ram, so caching is not a factor), I get
> performance about where I want it to be: about 5.7 - 6ms per block. But
> if that file is 2TB then the time almost doubles, to 11ms. Why is this?
> No other factors changed, only the filesize.
>
> Another note, on this partition there is no other file then this one
> file.
>
> I am assuming that somewhere along the way, the kernel now has to do an
> additional read from the disk for some metadata for xfs... perhaps the
> btree for the file doesn't fit in the kernel's memory? so it actually
> needs to do 2 seeks, one to find out where to go on disk then one to
> get the data. Is that the case? If so, how can I remedy this? How can I
> tell the kernel to keep all of the files xfs data in memory?
Hi Tim,
[please CC this sort of question to xfs@oss.sgi.com]
Can you send xfs_info output for the filesystem and the output
from xfs_bmap -vvp on this file?
The file size has zero effect on performance, but the number and
layout of the files extents is very relevent. How was this file
created?
cheers.
--
Nathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-22 22:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-22 18:57 tuning for large files in xfs fitzboy
2006-05-22 19:15 ` Avi Kivity
2006-05-22 19:32 ` fitzboy
2006-05-22 19:36 ` Avi Kivity
2006-05-23 0:40 ` fitzboy
2006-05-23 8:05 ` Avi Kivity
2006-05-23 20:21 ` fitzboy
2006-05-24 8:12 ` Avi Kivity
2006-05-22 22:22 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2006-05-22 22:30 ` Matheus Izvekov
2006-05-23 0:42 ` fitzboy
2006-05-23 1:07 ` Matheus Izvekov
2006-05-22 22:51 ` Nathan Scott [this message]
2006-05-23 0:49 ` fitzboy
2006-05-23 1:59 ` Nathan Scott
2006-05-24 1:41 ` fitzboy
2006-05-24 2:23 ` Nathan Scott
2006-05-25 19:15 ` fitzboy
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=20060523085116.B239136@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com \
--to=nathans@sgi.com \
--cc=fitzboy@iparadigms.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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