On 02/13/2012 06:15 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 06:11:30PM +0100, Richard Ems wrote: >> On 02/13/2012 06:08 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 05:57:58PM +0100, Richard Ems wrote: >>>> This is a backup system running dirvish, so most files in the dirs I am >>>> removing are hard links. Almost all of the files do have ACLs set. >>> >>> How many ACLs do you usually have set? If they aren't stored inline >>> but need to go out of the inode unlinks will be extremly slow for >>> kernels before v3.2. >>> >> >> Almost all dirs and files there do have ACLs set. >> Each of them do have about 10 user ACLs and 10 default ACls. >> Is that too many? >> Is this then the reason for being that slow? > > That doesn't sound like a lot to me, but instead of guessing around, > let's just check the actual facts. > > Does "xfs_bmap -a" for the kind of files you are deleting show any > extents? If it doesn't the output will look like: > > # xfs_bmap -a internal > internal: no extents > > if it has any it will look like: > > # xfs_bmap -a external > external: > 0: [0..7]: 8557712..8557719 > YES. All files (and dirs) that I checked do show something as 0: [0..7]: 18531216..18531223 So, what improvements can I expect from a kernel > 3.2 ? Can I read somewhere about the changes/patches introduced? Is there another way to mount/create/mkfs the XFS to improve the unlink time for this case? Thanks again, Richard -- Richard Ems mail: Richard.Ems@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cape Horn Engineering S.L. C/ Dr. J.J. Dómine 1, 5º piso 46011 Valencia Tel : +34 96 3242923 / Fax 924 http://www.cape-horn-eng.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
