|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-29 04:03:54 |
Has anyone here, who uses XFS fs, experiencing slow
filesystem writes?
I'm seeing throughput of like 4-3MB/s instead of like
previously
15-20MB/s.
I have read that there was some thing about
"barriers" and I've tried
re-mounting the FS w/ "nobarriers" but the
performance didn't improve.
I've already fscked the fs w/ the latest xfsprogs (>
2.8.0) to no good
effect.
Anyone has any clue or suggestions? Else, I'm gonna go and
change the FS
back to EXT3.
BTW: it's my /home which is XFS which houses GIGs of Mbox
files as well
as VMware images.
--
gentoo-user gentoo.org mailing list
|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-29 04:25:42 |
|
Hello,
I just had the same problem. I switched to XFS about two weeks ago, and all I've heard out of my hard drive since then is churning and grinding. Untarring large files is multitudes slower, even a simple emerge --sync takes extra time. ; Booting was also much slower. I never measured throughput, but it was bad enough that a benchmark was not needed to confirm it. Previously I had been using ext3 with no problems, no hard drive churning. I switched from xfs to reiser4 today out of frusteration... Problem solved.
--
Jason Weisberger
gmail.com">jbdubbsgmail.com
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-29 06:11:43 |
Ow Mun Heng wrote:
> Has anyone here, who uses XFS fs, experiencing slow
filesystem writes?
> I'm seeing throughput of like 4-3MB/s instead of like
previously
> 15-20MB/s.
> I have read that there was some thing about
"barriers" and I've tried
> re-mounting the FS w/ "nobarriers" but the
performance didn't improve.
>
> I've already fscked the fs w/ the latest xfsprogs
(> 2.8.0) to no good
> effect.
>
> Anyone has any clue or suggestions? Else, I'm gonna go
and change the FS
> back to EXT3.
>
> BTW: it's my /home which is XFS which houses GIGs of
Mbox files as well
> as VMware images.
>
>
What is your kernel version? (could be important).
I'm using 2.7.11 on kernel 2.6.16, write performance is
reasonably good
- 100 Mb/s on a 4 disk raid0 array (in fact I could probably
do better
if the promise driver would let me run the disks at udma5
instead of
udma6....)
Cheers
Mark
--
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list
|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-29 06:37:10 |
On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 18:11 +1200, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Ow Mun Heng wrote:
> > Has anyone here, who uses XFS fs, experiencing
slow filesystem writes?
> > I'm seeing throughput of like 4-3MB/s instead of
like previously
> > 15-20MB/s.
> > I have read that there was some thing about
"barriers" and I've tried
> > re-mounting the FS w/ "nobarriers" but
the performance didn't improve.
> >
> > I've already fscked the fs w/ the latest xfsprogs
(> 2.8.0) to no good
> > effect.
> >
> > Anyone has any clue or suggestions? Else, I'm
gonna go and change the FS
> > back to EXT3.
> >
> > BTW: it's my /home which is XFS which houses GIGs
of Mbox files as well
> > as VMware images.
> >
> >
>
> What is your kernel version? (could be important).
I've already updated it to the latest based on the suspend2
version.
$uname -r
2.6.17-suspend2-r4
$eix xfsprogs
Available versions: 2.7.3 2.7.11 2.8.10
Installed: 2.8.10
>
> I'm using 2.7.11 on kernel 2.6.16, write performance
is reasonably good
If not mistaken, the issue, (or barriers if not mistaken)
was introduced
in the 2.6.17 kernel series.
the 2.6.16 series wasn't affected. (I could be wrong, I
don't have net
access so, I can't verify)
--
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list
|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-29 09:37:35 |
On 8/28/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Hengwdc.com> wrote:
> Has anyone here, who uses XFS fs, experiencing slow
filesystem writes?
> I'm seeing throughput of like 4-3MB/s instead of like
previously
> 15-20MB/s.
> I have read that there was some thing about
"barriers" and I've tried
> re-mounting the FS w/ "nobarriers" but the
performance didn't improve.
Hmm, nothing that I have seen. I'm running 2.6.18-rc2. My
xfs
settings look like:
carcharias rjf # sysctl -a | grep xfs
fs.xfs.stats_clear = 0
fs.xfs.inherit_nodefrag = 1
fs.xfs.rotorstep = 1
fs.xfs.inherit_nosymlinks = 0
fs.xfs.age_buffer_centisecs = 1500
fs.xfs.xfsbufd_centisecs = 100
fs.xfs.inherit_noatime = 1
fs.xfs.inherit_nodump = 1
fs.xfs.inherit_sync = 1
fs.xfs.xfssyncd_centisecs = 500
fs.xfs.error_level = 3
fs.xfs.panic_mask = 0
fs.xfs.irix_symlink_mode = 0
fs.xfs.irix_sgid_inherit = 0
fs.xfs.restrict_chown = 1
I would make sure you are not mounting with the sync option,
or have
anything with the sync flag set (chattr/lsattr). I have
seen that
result in performance like you describe...
-Richard
--
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list
|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-29 09:55:32 |
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 10:37, Richard Fish wrote:
> fs.xfs.xfssyncd_centisecs = 500
Mine is set at 3000 by default, why is yours set at 500?
--
Regards,
Mick
|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-29 09:58:42 |
There are a number of things you can do to speed up XFS.
# <file system> <mount point> <type>
<options> <dump> <pass>
/dev/sda2 / xfs
logbufs=8,logbsize=262144,biosize=16,noatime,nodiratime 0
1
Try this 
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Mick wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 August 2006 10:37, Richard Fish wrote:
>
>> fs.xfs.xfssyncd_centisecs = 500
>
> Mine is set at 3000 by default, why is yours set at
500?
> --
> Regards,
> Mick
>
--
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list
|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-30 01:23:50 |
Ow Mun Heng wrote:
>
> I've already updated it to the latest based on the
suspend2 version.
> $uname -r
> 2.6.17-suspend2-r4
>
> $eix xfsprogs
> Available versions: 2.7.3 2.7.11 2.8.10
> Installed: 2.8.10
>
>
> If not mistaken, the issue, (or barriers if not
mistaken) was introduced
> in the 2.6.17 kernel series.
> the 2.6.16 series wasn't affected. (I could be wrong,
I don't have net
> access so, I can't verify)
>
Right - as it happens I'm doing an update today, so will
let you know if
I see any write performance change.
Cheers
Mark
--
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list
|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-30 23:23:31 |
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Ow Mun Heng wrote:
>>
>> I've already updated it to the latest based on the
suspend2 version.
>> $uname -r
>> 2.6.17-suspend2-r4
>>
>> $eix xfsprogs
>> Available versions: 2.7.3 2.7.11 2.8.10
>> Installed: 2.8.10
>>
>>
>> If not mistaken, the issue, (or barriers if not
mistaken) was introduced
>> in the 2.6.17 kernel series.
>> the 2.6.16 series wasn't affected. (I could be
wrong, I don't have net
>> access so, I can't verify)
>>
>
> Right - as it happens I'm doing an update today, so
will let you know if
> I see any write performance change.
>
FWIW, I've updated to 2.6.17 and I don't see any change in
performance
at all (215Mb/s reads and 100Mb/s writes).
Now I'm on the standard source tree:
$ uname -r
2.6.17-gentoo-r7
$ eix xfsprogs
Available versions: 2.7.3 2.7.11 ~2.8.10
Installed: 2.7.11
which may be a factor.
The other thing I notice is that my filesystems are all
under 50%,
whereas your troublesome one was at 80%or so:
$ df -m
Filesystem 1M-blocks Used Available Use%
Mounted on
/dev/md/2 529 134 395 26% /
/dev/md/0 129 10 120 8%
/boot
/dev/md/3 3911 32 3880 1% /tmp
/dev/md/4 3911 175 3737 5% /var
/dev/md/5 19537 3008 16530 16% /usr
/dev/md/6 19537 2668 16870 14%
/home
/dev/md/7 104841 25682 79160 25%
/data0
I might try writing a few big files to fill one of 'em up
and see if it
makes any difference!
Cheers
Mark
--
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list
|
|
| XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes |
|
2006-08-30 23:25:27 |
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood wrote:
>> Ow Mun Heng wrote:
>>>
>>> I've already updated it to the latest based on
the suspend2 version.
>>> $uname -r
>>> 2.6.17-suspend2-r4
>>>
>>> $eix xfsprogs
>>> Available versions: 2.7.3 2.7.11 2.8.10
>>> Installed: 2.8.10
>>>
>>>
>>> If not mistaken, the issue, (or barriers if not
mistaken) was introduced
>>> in the 2.6.17 kernel series.
>>> the 2.6.16 series wasn't affected. (I could be
wrong, I don't have net
>>> access so, I can't verify)
>>>
>>
>> Right - as it happens I'm doing an update today,
so will let you know if
>> I see any write performance change.
>>
>
>
> FWIW, I've updated to 2.6.17 and I don't see any
change in performance at all
> (215Mb/s reads and 100Mb/s writes).
>
> Now I'm on the standard source tree:
>
> $ uname -r
> 2.6.17-gentoo-r7
>
> $ eix xfsprogs
> Available versions: 2.7.3 2.7.11 ~2.8.10
> Installed: 2.7.11
>
> which may be a factor.
>
> The other thing I notice is that my filesystems are all
under 50%, whereas
> your troublesome one was at 80%or so:
>
> $ df -m
> Filesystem 1M-blocks Used Available Use%
Mounted on
> /dev/md/2 529 134 395 26%
/
> /dev/md/0 129 10 120 8%
/boot
> /dev/md/3 3911 32 3880 1%
/tmp
> /dev/md/4 3911 175 3737 5%
/var
> /dev/md/5 19537 3008 16530 16%
/usr
> /dev/md/6 19537 2668 16870 14%
/home
> /dev/md/7 104841 25682 79160 25%
/data0
>
> I might try writing a few big files to fill one of 'em
up and see if it makes
> any difference!
>
> Cheers
>
> Mark
> --
> gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list
>
You can also check your fragmentation, xfs_db -c frag
/dev/..
and defrag it with xfs_fsir ..
--
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list
|
|