xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Performance question

To: Joshua Baker-LePain <jlb17@xxxxxxxx>, sandeen@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Performance question
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 07:18:00 +1100
Cc: Linux xfs mailing list <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0402181131210.25541@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from jlb17@xxxxxxxx on Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 12:57:35PM -0500
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0402181131210.25541@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 12:57:35PM -0500, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
> I have a server with a single 3ware 7500-8 board and 8 Maxtor 160GB disks 
> running as a hardware RAID5 w/ a hot spare.  I'm running RedHat 7.3 and 
> the 2.4.18-18SGI_XFS_1.2.0smp kernel (more on the kernel later).  The 
> partitions look like this:
> 
> Filesystem           1k-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
> /dev/sda1               505605    133975    345526  28% /
> /dev/sda2              4127108   3810308    107152  98% /home
> none                   1031920         0   1031920   0% /dev/shm
> /dev/sda7              1027768     20140    955420   3% /tmp
> /dev/sda3              2063536   1797416    161296  92% /usr
> /dev/sda5              3099260   2799304    142524  96% /usr/local
> /dev/sda6              1027768    117548    858012  13% /var
> /dev/sda8            948330428 627683892 320646536  67% /data
> 
> Only /data is XFS, the rest are ext3.  Backups on /data on this machine 
> have been slowing to a crawl.  I use amanda, and even the estimate phase 
> (which does 'tar cf /dev/null' and so should be very fast) takes hours.  I 
> tried upgrading to 2.4.21 plus the 1.3 XFS patches (I'm running this on 2 
> other 3ware based servers), and this made the situation much worse.  
> During backups, the OOM killer started going crazy, killing bash sessions 
> and eventually the estimate tar process.

Sounds like Eric's area of expertise. :)  Could be another
case of inodes not being reclaimed aggresively enough, and
OOM follows...?

> In narrowing down the problem, it seems that one particular (large) 
> directory is the main culprit.  This dir is 471,401,788 KB big and has 
> 3,377,520 files (~140KB/file average).  Is the large number of files the 
> entire culprit?  If so, is there anything I can do to alleviate the 
> problem?  I already 'mount -o logbufs=8'.  Here's xfs_info on that 

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


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