[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Poor interactive performance with I/O loads with fsync()ing
    On Sun, 11 Apr 2010, Andi Kleen wrote:

    > > XFS does not do much better. Just moved my VM images back to ext for
    > > that reason.
    > Did you move from XFS to ext3? ext3 defaults to barriers off, XFS on,
    > which can make a big difference depending on the disk. You can
    > disable them on XFS too of course, with the known drawbacks.
    > XFS also typically needs some tuning to get reasonable log sizes.
    > My point was merely (before people chime in with counter examples)
    > that XFS/btrfs/jfs don't suffer from the "need to sync all transactions for
    > every fsync" issue. There can (and will be) still other issues.

    Yes, I moved them back from XFS to ext3 simply because moving them
    from ext3 to XFS turned out to be a completely unusable disaster.

    I know that I can tweak knobs on XFS (or any other file system), but I
    would not have expected that it sucks that much for KVM with the
    default settings which are perfectly fine for the other use cases
    which made us move to XFS.



     \ /
      Last update: 2010-04-11 23:59    [W:0.019 / U:57.472 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site