lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: XFS vs Elevators (was Re: [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system)
    On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 03:15:08PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
    > On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 05:46:00AM +0300, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote:
    > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Dave Chinner wrote:
    > > Everything is default.
    > >
    > > % rpm -qf =mkfs.xfs
    > > xfsprogs-2.9.8-7.1
    > >
    > > which, according to ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/cmd_tars, is the
    > > latest stable mkfs.xfs. Its output is
    > >
    > > meta-data=/dev/sda8 isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=1221440 blks
    > > = sectsz=512 attr=2
    > > data = bsize=4096 blocks=4885760, imaxpct=25
    > > = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks
    > > naming =version 2 bsize=4096
    > > log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=2560, version=2
    > > = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=0
    > > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0
    >
    > Ok, I thought it might be the tiny log, but it didn't improve anything
    > here when increased the log size, or the log buffer size.

    One thing I just found out - my old *laptop* is 4-5x faster than the
    10krpm scsi disk behind an old cciss raid controller. I'm wondering
    if the long delays in dispatch is caused by an interaction with CTQ
    but I can't change it on the cciss raid controllers. Are you using
    ctq/ncq on your machine? If so, can you reduce the depth to
    something less than 4 and see what difference that makes?

    Cheers,

    Dave.
    --
    Dave Chinner
    david@fromorbit.com


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-08-21 08:07    [W:0.032 / U:96.116 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site