xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Performance impact of mkfs.xfs vs mkfs.xfs -f

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Performance impact of mkfs.xfs vs mkfs.xfs -f
From: Shrinand Javadekar <shrinand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 14:24:32 -0700
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CABppvi6GdaTQgqpYJi6RhkpjP9ydTV8-2VV8LF9tHSN63XzWtA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <CABppvi6GdaTQgqpYJi6RhkpjP9ydTV8-2VV8LF9tHSN63XzWtA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Does previously existing data on disk affect fragmentation?

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Shrinand Javadekar
<shrinand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have 23 disks formatted with XFS on a single server. The workload is
> Openstack Swift. See this email from a few months ago about the
> details:
>
> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2015-06/msg00108.html
>
> I am observing some strange behavior and would like to get some
> feedback about why this is happening.
>
> I formatted the disks with xfs (mkfs.xfs) and deployed Openstack Swift
> on it. Writing 100GB of data into Swift in batches of 20GB each gave
> us the following throughput:
>
>  20 GB: 93MB/s
>  40 GB: 65MB/s
>  60 GB: 52MB/s
>  80 GB: 50MB/s
> 100 GB: 48MB/s
>
> I then re-formatted the disks with mkfs.xfs -f and ran the experiment
> again. This time I got the following throughput:
>
>  20 GB: 118MB/s
>  40 GB: 95MB/s
>  60 GB: 74MB/s
>  80 GB: 68MB/s
> 100 GB: 63MB/s
>
> I've seen similar results twice.
>
> Any ideas why this might be happening?
>
> Thanks in advance.
> -Shri

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