xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: NFS 0 sizes bug, high nfsd load

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: NFS 0 sizes bug, high nfsd load
From: Robin Humble <rjh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:22:19 +1100 (EDT)
In-reply-to: <200102261735.f1QHZbe25954@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> from "Steve Lord" at Feb 26, 2001 11:35:37 AM
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Steve writes:
>NFS problem deleted - we will have to do some investigating there.

ok - thanks.

Re: bonnie++ results:
>You are running into the journalling features of XFS big time here, try
>using a larger number of files for reiserfs, it does not sync its
>journal out to disk more than once a minute unless it fills it, and since
>these are lots of empty files they take very little room in reiserfs.
>ext2 is just manipulating memory and not doing disk I/O much at all in
>this case.

ah - ok. I understand the results now. Basically it sounds like
default bonnie++ behaviour is being unrealistically nice to
ext2/ReiserFS and unrealistically cruel to XFS :-)

Perhaps a bonnie++ run with small but non-zero size files would be more
realistic, and might force ReiserFS to do more work. I'll give that a go.

Can I ask what the state of software RAID0 and RAID5 is? I note from
the list archives that there has been some success, but it's not
clear how stable things are.

cheers,
robin

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>