On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 03:14:34PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Between 2.6.33 and 2.6.37 there was a lot of interesting announcements
> with regards to XFS performance. However, now that I booted into
> 2.6.37.2, I still see the metadata slowness from earlier.
> (Basically `time (tar -xf linux-2.6.37.tar.gz; sync)` - ext4 gets the
> job done in like 15-20 seconds, xfs is still syncing after 11 minutes.)
>
> Was there something I missed?
>
> # xfs_info /
> meta-data=/dev/md3 isize=256 agcount=32,
> agsize=11429117 blks
> = sectsz=512 attr=2
> data = bsize=4096 blocks=365731739,
> imaxpct=5
> = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks
> naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0
> log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=32768, version=2
> = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=0
^^^^^^^^^^^^
> realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0
You're using an old mkfs? At minimum, this should have lazy-count=1.
I'm also wondering about the fact this is a MD device but there is
no sunit/swidth set, and the agcount of 32 is not a default value,
either. Seems like you handrolled your mkfs parameters - it is
better to just use the defaults a recent mkfs sets....
Further - what is your storage configuration (e.g. what type of MD
raid are you using) and is the filesystem correctly aligned to the
storage? If you get these wrong, then nothing else you do will
improve performance.
What are your mount options - perhaps you've missed the fact that
the new functionality requires the "delaylog" mount option to be
added. Mind you, that is not a magic bullet - if the operation is
single threaded and CPU bound, delaylog makes no difference to
performance, and with lazy-count=0 then the superblock will still be
a major contention point and probably nullify any improvement
delaylog could provide..
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
