On 02/13/2012 06:29 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 06:26:46PM +0100, Richard Ems wrote: >> 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? > > On some crazy workloads I've seen speedups up to a factor of 10.000 (5 > orders or magnitude). You probably won't get that much of a speedup, > but it will still be significant. > > The patch in mainline for this is: > > commit 859f57ca00805e6c482eef1a7ab073097d02c8ca > Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Sat Aug 27 14:45:11 2011 +0000 > > xfs: avoid synchronous transactions when deleting attr blocks > >> Is there another way to mount/create/mkfs the XFS to improve the unlink >> time for this case? > > Try increasing the inode size during filesystem creating using the > "-i size=512" option or even "-i size=1024" if you still have > out of line attributes. The should give you even bigger speedups > for this workload than the patch above. > Ok, Many thanks for this good info! I will try to install a > 3.2 kernel and will create new XFS partitions with "-i size=1024", since we use ACLs a lot for user access. Is there a chance to change existing XFS partitions to "-i size=1024" ? I already have 5 big partitions, all full of ACLs and not running kernels > 3.2 ! Many 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
