xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Question: why does dbench take so much longer to run on XFSthen ext2

To: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Question: why does dbench take so much longer to run on XFSthen ext2 file system
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 18:26:57 +0100
Cc: Philip Chiang <pchiang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1011284870.13548.632.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <006001c19ee0$aa218170$1701a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1011222311.3602.10.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <000801c19ee4$d012ce30$1701a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1011284870.13548.632.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:27:50AM -0600, Steve Lord wrote:
> My leaning is towards a problem with your build of xfs, or the parameters
> used. You did not by any chance turn on the debug parameters in xfs did
> you? Having a CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG=y in your .config options will turn xfs into
> a dog with 2400 ASSERTS and a lot of other checking addded to the filesystem.

Assuming XFS is compiled in, not built as a module, just booting with 
profile=2, running the test and then afterwards running /usr/sbin/readprofile
with the right System.map should show very quickly where the CPU is wasted. 
(the simple profiler unfortunately cannot deal with modules) 

-Andi


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