Re: tuning for large files in xfs

[Avi Kivity <avi@argo.co.il>]

fitzboy wrote:
>
> 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.
>

With the 20GB file, the disk head is seeking over 1% of the tracks. With 
the 2TB file, it is seeking over 100% of the tracks.

>
> 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

No, the btree should be completely cached fairly soon into the test.

> 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?

Add more disks. If you're writing, use RAID 1.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.