xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ag selection

To: Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: ag selection
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:30:18 -0600
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <528120B7.9030802@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <l5r3tf$m0j$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20131111175313.GA16643@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20131111175550.GB16643@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <528120B7.9030802@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
On 11/11/13, 12:23 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote:

> One of my colleagues benchmarked this on one of our fast systems and another 
> colleague current needs this system for other tests, so I don't have the 
> exact parameters. However, it was for sure formated with options like these:
> 
> mkfs.xfs -d su=256k,sw=10 -l version=2,su=256k -isize=512 /dev/sdX
> 
> and mounted with these options:
> 
> mount 
> -onoatime,nodiratime,largeio,inode64,swalloc,allocsize=131072k,nobarrier 
> /dev/sdX <mountpoint>

With all due respect, this is excessive knob-twiddling.  Slow down.  ;)

* V2 logs are default already, so -l version=2 is redundant.
* noatime implies nodiratime, so specifying both is redundant.
* "largeio" only changes the st_blksize value reported (from default page size 
to, in your case, the total stripe width).  Does that actually affect your 
application behavior?

Backing up, what kernel & what userspace versions are you testing?

-Eric

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