X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0-r929098 (2010-03-30) on oss.sgi.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.4.0-r929098 Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p3QNuxht188263 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:57:00 -0500 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1303862429-5d5f01220000-NocioJ X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from edge20.ethz.ch (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 98D6F133290F for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 17:00:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from edge20.ethz.ch (edge20.ethz.ch [82.130.99.26]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id pCrOk8tV9OisFaUO for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 17:00:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CAS20.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.110) by edge20.ethz.ch (82.130.99.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.289.1; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 02:00:27 +0200 Received: from [10.0.0.2] (84.227.99.136) by CAS20.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.110) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.289.1; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 02:00:28 +0200 Message-ID: <4DB75C6D.1080901@inf.ethz.ch> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 01:59:41 +0200 From: Benjamin Schindler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110307 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stan Hoeppner CC: X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: xfs performance problem Subject: Re: xfs performance problem References: <4DB72084.8020205@inf.ethz.ch> <4DB74331.3030804@hardwarefreak.com> In-Reply-To: <4DB74331.3030804@hardwarefreak.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [84.227.99.136] X-Barracuda-Connect: edge20.ethz.ch[82.130.99.26] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1303862431 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0176 1.0000 -1.9067 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-1.91 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=2.1 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.2.62026 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.94.2, clamav-milter version 0.94.2 on oss.sgi.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Hi I thought I would do a real measurement to have some numbers. On my raid-1 ext3, extracting a kernel archive: benjamin@metis ~/software $ time tar xfj /usr/portage/distfiles/linux-2.6.38.tar.bz2 real 0m21.769s user 0m13.905s sys 0m1.751s On my root xfs root@metis ~ $ time tar xfj /usr/portage/distfiles/linux-2.6.38.tar.bz2 real 2m20.522s user 0m16.051s sys 0m3.147s This is of course with delaylog enabled. I don't think a difference of a factor 7 is normal, given that writing to a raid-0 (xfs numbers) is supposed to be faster than writing to raid-1 (ext3 numbers) Cheers Benjamin On 27.04.2011 00:12, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > Benjamin Schindler put forth on 4/26/2011 2:44 PM: >> Hi >> >> Since upgrading to newer kernels I have serious problems with xfs >> performance on my root fs. >> It runs on a software raid 0 with 2 disks. On the same two disks, there >> are two more partitions running a software raid-1 with ext3. On the ext3 >> system, I have no issue, so I assume the drives are fine. >> But on the xfs filesystem, extracting a linux kernel archive takes 5 >> minutes or more, running ldconfig similarily long. The harddrives are >> sata-2. >> I'm running gentoo linux with kernel 2.6.38-gentoo-r1. I'm attaching the >> kernel config but I guess more info is needed - just let me know what is >> needed. > > The kernel config isn't the problem. You haven't enabled the delayed > logging feature. Add 'delaylog' to your fstab mount options for XFS > devices, remount (or reboot if necessary) and it should decrease the run > time of kernel tar extractions between 10x and 100x. > > Also, slap yourself in the forehead at least 3 times for running your > root filesystem on RAID 0. That's akin to riding a motorcycle, naked, > in a blizzard, down a steep, winding, ice covered mountain road with no > guard rails and a 3000 ft drop. ;) >