xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Fedora 8.0.1 XFS Tune on HW RAID for Max Write Throughput?

To: "David Chinner" <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Fedora 8.0.1 XFS Tune on HW RAID for Max Write Throughput?
From: "Changliang Chen" <hqucocl@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:07:14 +0800
Cc: "Eric Sandeen" <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Alex Madarasz" <List.XFS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=+gpsjdz5nzY3VNpF5GsvlnD97JFsVrxFDdmsmOTE+0U=; b=ZGHf1aIVvLB5BfTv+Y9QdTtLFFuo4eNazGBp+GMAguilz12F8tNDgwk9jsCtnZ/Fdc4RMp5VDowEYWAbWxukdDLO1C7d7hht0TEg7qq0lNRDn0PQQDiVZqctZTeb+bqynX+ZyGpFsYdAeLGIvOkwtEaVor89fYBijiddWC2bIBk=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=gcVjFdOUVYnzESMW1moVfRabuEYaBEOaujSs3QKIKmrQ67JCvulU3wUmpNi5beKcQ7OUxX+vBh5oc4sM/X/HsSuT66CPFBBkvl5dTUcaqo1ECTe9XjuP9byViy82XLIZ+U27fynnmaLpcuVUYNrD6w27/gjiKfW8I5VacttsUWY=
In-reply-to: <20071216233127.GY4612@sgi.com>
References: <1197653927.3841.1226620089@webmail.messagingengine.com> <4764AB08.7040608@sandeen.net> <20071216233127.GY4612@sgi.com>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hi
  We have use xfs for storage's filesystem which has reach 4T per
node.inour mkfs option,we always use agsize=
4g.Is this any problem, and any suggest?
  By the way,how many agcounts the [new] mkfs defaults make?


2007/12/17, David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>:
>
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 10:35:20PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > Alex Madarasz wrote:
> > > We're building a new Fedora 8.0.1 Linux system to stream data from a
> > > 250Msps ADC to disk, and want to start tuning the system configuration
> > > for maximum XFS write performance.  To date, without any significant
> > > effort at tuning our Fedora 7 dev system, we're seeing 250MBps write
> > > with 8-bit samples and ~ 300MBps write with 16-bit samples. We want to
> > > push the tuning as far as we can go with this architecture before we
> > > start looking at other hardware options.  Looking at various other
> > > tuning pages on the Web finds few that are interested in maxing out
> > > sequential writes to very large arrays while using SAS HW RAID with
> big
> > > fast SAS drives too.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > XFS Tuning Options?
> > >
> > > - HW RAID0:
> > >   - Array/logical disk HW RAID stripe size?
> >
> > At any rate you'll want to match xfs's geometry with the raid geometry.
> >
> > >   - Cache enabled (some reports that cache s/b turned off?)?
> >
> > If it's battery-backed cache, leave it on, and disable barriers in xfs
> > (it's a mount option)
> >
> > >   - xfs mkfs / mount options?
> >
> > David mentioned these before as a generic place to start:
> >
> > # mkfs.xfs -f -l lazy-count=1,version=2,size=128m -i attr=2 -d agcount=4
> > <dev>
> > # mount -o logbsize=256k <dev> <mtpt>
> >
> > and that those would be upcoming new defaults for mkfs.
> >
> > 4 ags may not be what you want for a ~2T filesystem.
>
> Right - the 4 AG tuning is effectively for single disk configurations to
> limit parallelism and therefore keep seeks between AGs down. When you
> have multiple disks, the [new] mkfs defaults should be just fine (i.e.
> just drop the agcount suggestion).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> Principal Engineer
> SGI Australian Software Group
>
>
>


-- 
Best Regards


[[HTML alternate version deleted]]


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