| To: | "xfs"<xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Eric Sandeen"<sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "bfoster"<bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS buffer IO performance is very poor |
| From: | "yy" <yy@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 12 Feb 2015 14:59:52 +0800 |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In function xfs_file_aio_read, will request XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED lock for both direct IO and buffered IO: STATIC ssize_t xfs_file_aio_read( struct kiocb *iocb, const struct iovec *iovp, unsigned long nr_segs, loff_t pos) { ... xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED); so write will prevent read in XFS. However, in function generic_file_aio_read for ext3, will not lock inode->i_mutex, so write will not prevent read in ext3. I think this maybe the reason of poor performance for XFS. I do not know if this is a bug, or design flaws of XFS. Best regards, yy ååéä åää: yy<yy@xxxxxxxxxxx> æää: xfs<xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Eric Sandeen<sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx åéæé: 2015å2æ12æ(åå)â13:30 äé: Re: XFS buffer IO performance is very poor Brian and Eric, Thanks very much for your replay. I changed partition start position with 256K, but the performance is still poor, no change. # fdisk -ul /dev/sdb Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 512 2929356359 1464677924 83 Linux I checked the XFSâs code, I agree that XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL lock maybe the reason: STATIC ssize_t xfs_file_buffered_aio_write( struct kiocb *iocb, const struct iovec *iovp, unsigned long nr_segs, loff_t pos, size_t ocount) { struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp; struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping; struct inode *inode = mapping->host; struct xfs_inode *ip = XFS_I(inode); ssize_t ret; int enospc = 0; int iolock = XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL; size_t count = ocount; xfs_rw_ilock(ip, iolock); ret = xfs_file_aio_write_checks(file, &pos, &count, &iolock); if (ret) HoweverïI found that EXT3 also have mutex when with buffered IO: ssize_t generic_file_aio_write(struct kiocb *iocb, const struct iovec *iov, unsigned long nr_segs, loff_t pos) { struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp; struct inode *inode = file->f_mapping->host; ssize_t ret; BUG_ON(iocb->ki_pos != pos); sb_start_write(inode->i_sb); mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex); ret = __generic_file_aio_write(iocb, iov, nr_segs, &iocb->ki_pos); mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex); I still donât understand why ext3 does not have this problem with buffered IO. Best regards, yy ååéä åää: Eric Sandeen<sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> æää: yy<yy@xxxxxxxxxxx>; xfs<xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> åéæé: 2015å2æ12æ(åå)â00:08 äé: Re: XFS buffer IO performance is very poor On 2/11/15 1:39 AM, yy wrote: <snip> (In addition to Brian's questions): > 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 so 128*512 = 64k; your partition doesn't start on a 256k stripe unit boundary, right? Shouldn't it do so? -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Статья 52. Осуществление строительства, реконструкции, капитального ремонта объекта капитального строительства, ГосСтройЭкспертиза |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: xfs_logprint segfault with external log, Alexander Tsvetkov |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS buffer IO performance is very poor, yy |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS buffer IO performance is very poor, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |