xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS buffer IO performance is very poor

To: yy <yy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS buffer IO performance is very poor
From: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:35:33 -0500
Cc: xfs <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <tencent_39AFE52BC5E06F89B6B2B3ED@xxxxxx>
References: <tencent_39AFE52BC5E06F89B6B2B3ED@xxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:39:52PM +0800, yy wrote:
> Hi,
> I am run some test with fio on XFS, and I found that buffer IO is very poor. 
> These are some result:
> 
> 
> read(iops) write(iops)
> direct IO + ext3 1848  1232
> buffer IO + ext3 1976 1319
> direct IO + XFS 1954 1304
> buffer IO + XFS 307 203
> 
> 
> I do not understand why such a big differenceïext3 is much better.
> direct IO parameters:
> fio --filename=/data1/fio.dat âdirect=1 --thread --rw=randrw --rwmixread=60 
> --ioengine=libaio --runtime=300 --iodepth=1 --size=40G --numjobs=32 
> -name=test_rw --group_reporting --bs=16k âtime_base
> 
> 
> buffer IO parametes:
> fio --filename=/data1/fio.dat --direct=0 --thread --rw=randrw --rwmixread=60 
> --ioengine=libaio --runtime=300 --iodepth=1 --size=40G --numjobs=32 
> -name=test_rw --group_reporting --bs=16k âtime_base
> 
> 

I just gave this fio command a whirl on a rhel6 box I have here. It
looks to me that this is sending 32 parallel randrw jobs to a single
file. With buffered I/O, these writes are exclusively locked whereas
direct I/O is shared locked.

So you aren't really exercising the filesystem or storage by pounding on
the same file with 32 threads. If you use separate files for buffered
I/O (e.g., remove the --filename param), you'll probably see a bump in
iops.

Brian

> the system I've used for my tests:
> HW server: 4 cores (Intel), 32GB RAM, running RHEL 6.5
> Kernel:2.6.32-431.el6.x86_64
> storage: 10disks RAID1+0, stripe size: 256KB
> 
> 
> XFS format parametes:
> #mkfs.xfs -d su=256k,sw=5 /dev/sdb1
> #cat /proc/mounts
> /dev/sdb1 /data1 xfs 
> rw,noatime,attr2,delaylog,nobarrier,logbsize=256k,sunit=512,swidth=2560,noquota
>  0 0
> #fdisk -ul
> Device Boot   Start     End   Blocks  Id System
> /dev/sdb1       128 2929356359 1464678116  83 Linux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> # fio --filename=/data1/fio.dat --direct=0 --thread --rw=randrw 
> --rwmixread=60 --ioengine=libaio --runtime=300 --iodepth=1 --size=40G 
> --numjobs=32 -name=test_rw --group_reporting --bs=16k --time_base
> test_rw: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=16K-16K/16K-16K/16K-16K, ioengine=libaio, 
> iodepth=1
> ...
> test_rw: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=16K-16K/16K-16K/16K-16K, ioengine=libaio, 
> iodepth=1
> fio-2.0.13
> Starting 32 threads
> Jobs: 32 (f=32): [mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm] [100.0% done] 
> [5466K/3644K/0K /s] [341 /227 /0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
> test_rw: (groupid=0, jobs=32): err= 0: pid=5711: Wed Feb 11 15:26:30 2015
>  read : io=1442.2MB, bw=4922.3KB/s, iops=307 , runt=300010msec
>   slat (usec): min=7 , max=125345 , avg=5765.52, stdev=3741.61
>   clat (usec): min=0 , max=192 , avg= 2.72, stdev= 1.12
>   lat (usec): min=7 , max=125348 , avg=5770.09, stdev=3741.68
>   clat percentiles (usec):
>   | 1.00th=[  1], 5.00th=[  2], 10.00th=[  2], 20.00th=[  2],
>   | 30.00th=[  2], 40.00th=[  3], 50.00th=[  3], 60.00th=[  3],
>   | 70.00th=[  3], 80.00th=[  3], 90.00th=[  3], 95.00th=[  4],
>   | 99.00th=[  4], 99.50th=[  4], 99.90th=[  14], 99.95th=[  16],
>   | 99.99th=[  20]
>   bw (KB/s) : min=  16, max= 699, per=3.22%, avg=158.37, stdev=85.79
>  write: io=978736KB, bw=3262.4KB/s, iops=203 , runt=300010msec
>   slat (usec): min=10 , max=577043 , avg=148215.93, stdev=125650.40
>   clat (usec): min=0 , max=198 , avg= 2.50, stdev= 1.26
>   lat (usec): min=11 , max=577048 , avg=148220.20, stdev=125650.94
>   clat percentiles (usec):
>   | 1.00th=[  1], 5.00th=[  1], 10.00th=[  1], 20.00th=[  2],
>   | 30.00th=[  2], 40.00th=[  2], 50.00th=[  3], 60.00th=[  3],
>   | 70.00th=[  3], 80.00th=[  3], 90.00th=[  3], 95.00th=[  3],
>   | 99.00th=[  4], 99.50th=[  6], 99.90th=[  14], 99.95th=[  14],
>   | 99.99th=[  17]
>   bw (KB/s) : min=  25, max= 448, per=3.17%, avg=103.28, stdev=46.76
>   lat (usec) : 2=6.40%, 4=88.39%, 10=4.93%, 20=0.27%, 50=0.01%
>   lat (usec) : 100=0.01%, 250=0.01%
>  cpu     : usr=0.00%, sys=0.13%, ctx=238853, majf=18446744073709551520, 
> minf=18446744073709278371
>  IO depths  : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, =64=0.0%
>   submit  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, =64=0.0%
>   complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, =64=0.0%
>   issued  : total=r=92296/w=61171/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
> 
> 
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
>  READ: io=1442.2MB, aggrb=4922KB/s, minb=4922KB/s, maxb=4922KB/s, 
> mint=300010msec, maxt=300010msec
>  WRITE: io=978736KB, aggrb=3262KB/s, minb=3262KB/s, maxb=3262KB/s, 
> mint=300010msec, maxt=300010msec
> 
> 
> Disk stats (read/write):
>  sdb: ios=89616/55141, merge=0/0, ticks=442611/171325, in_queue=613823, 
> util=97.08%

> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

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