xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS Best Practices

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS Best Practices
From: Jeff Flowers <ragepie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 11:45:42 -0400
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZRbHTMWkJiPLFiQ7pxyGztKvMpnj8sf++g/wLOa/PBU=; b=ZGnL15m99c4GJ0Ey6P7kHkAfgCkA523VT2/nwBivhsdLoH4x+VV1VYp0OO7Nucu5Z0 YR7QAVouJRoDxNM7sYwv3nAPOr+w0RVKR8PGFGYrsm9ed7sTBkTie9zRZJ5yZwTexW/R kgaYjqEA+K185y/Iv4qmbRVRlt93zs+g0sUlY=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=xZMUPkKi9VDSVTQXyse2BuhddFigSxCLVLr7CNB650gFN3pWWoJcRjzAFGZx4j8Kqr jZqMDbJYQO2UtC+LhcU8D74xhnhQAD4sFImOiLTQER7h9BqQjGm3v7ozchqkiU5hYpJQ UKfIZQffvyYgkcBfI+ERXrjYDQdV4z1jKQNPQ=
In-reply-to: <4A8D6A6D.405@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <a0531a500908200800m3f5ea065v818c97e845042221@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4A8D6A6D.405@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Eric Sandeen<sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jeff Flowers wrote:
>> I am going to use XFS on a Arch Linux box and I am looking for ways to
>> maximize XFS performance. According to an article I have read [1],
>> best XFS performance was reached with a file system formatted with a
>> 64MB log and mounted with 8 log buffers and atime disabled. But I am
>> curious, from the prespective of the XFS experts of this list, if this
>> is still good advice and if it is still relevant, as this article was
>> published in 2003.
>
> Based on the information you've provided about the performance issues
> you're seeing with your particular workload (i.e., nothing), the
> existing defaults are perfect for you.  :)

For me, it is not about dissatisfaction with XFS performance but
simply wanting to know if there are optimizations I am missing and
could be taking advantage of. Many forums have people talking about
options to improve or optimize Ext3 and Ext4 performance but XFS seems
to be dismissed (which I don't understand, as XFS is a very mature and
proven filesystem).


>> Also, I have seen a few people recommend turning off the internal
>> buffers of hard drives (via hdparm) when using a file system like XFS.
>> Good advice?
>
> When drive write caches lose power it may lead to inconsistencies in a
> journaling filesystem like xfs, which relies on data hitting the disk in
> a certain order, more or less.  By default xfs issues barriers to
> enforce this ordering; this has the effect of flushing the write cache
> to make it safe.  In some cases disabling barriers and also disabling
> write cache may be a good choice.
>
> If you "never" lose power (good ups?) then write caching is safe even
> w/o barriers.
>
> -Eric

Thanks for the information. Your explaination of write barries is one
of the better ones I have read.

-- 
Jeff

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