From: Tomasz Torcz <tomek@pipebreaker.pl>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: yum upgrade on btrfs very slow
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:43:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090930194350.GA29166@mother.pipebreaker.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090929132538.GN6405@think>
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 09:25:38AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 08:18:22AM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 09:35:43AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > Every yum activity is very slow, like 15 minutes for installation of 11
> > > > packages 25MB in size. Kernel is 2.6.31.1-48.fc12.x86_64, btrfs-progs-0.19-7.fc12.x86_64.
> > > > Hardware is pentium 4 3.0 GHz (Hyperthreading, 64 bit), with single IDE disk
> > > > on Intel ICH controller.
> > >
> > > You're doing quite a lot of reads, and some writes. Could you please
> > > capture the output of sysrq-w at 5s intervals during the upgrade?
> >
> > It got quite big (over 100 KiB, over 1 MiB after unpacking), so I
> > put it at http://pipebreaker.pl/dump/sysrq-w_every_5_sec.txt.bz2
>
> Ok, you've got 158 sysrq-w runs in here, and 119 of them involve fsync.
> This is good because it is what Josef expected the problem to be.
>
> The first thing I would try is mount -o ssd. I think what is happening
> is that we are seeking around while fsyncing files. mount -o ssd isn't
> really the right long term answer but it will tell us if I've got it
> right.
Tried that. Not noticable faster. Dumps are here:
http://pipebreaker.pl/dump/sysrq_w-with_ssd.txt.bz2
http://pipebreaker.pl/dump/vmstat-with.ssd.txt.bz2
>
> If you're comparing w/ext3 and wondering why btrfs is sooooooo much
> slower it might be because btrfs has barriers on by default and ext3
> doesn't. You could mount -o nobarrier for btrfs or mount -o barrier=1
> for ext3 for a proper comparison.
>
> (Assuming your dmesg doesn't have messages from btrfs about disabling
> barriers).
I wouldn't expect barriers to work here (reminder, this is PATA drive
on ICH7 sata controller), but I will test tomorrow with nobarrier.
Then I probably check his "yum upgrade" under seekwatcher on friday.
--
Tomasz Torcz Morality must always be based on practicality.
xmpp: zdzichubg@chrome.pl -- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-30 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-28 12:18 yum upgrade on btrfs very slow Tomasz Torcz
2009-09-28 13:35 ` Chris Mason
2009-09-29 6:18 ` Tomasz Torcz
2009-09-29 13:25 ` Chris Mason
2009-09-30 19:43 ` Tomasz Torcz [this message]
2009-10-01 9:01 ` Tomasz Torcz
2009-10-21 9:27 ` Tomasz Torcz
2009-10-26 8:55 ` Chris Mason
2009-10-26 13:35 ` Tomasz Torcz
2009-10-01 9:04 ` Jens Axboe
2009-10-05 12:09 ` Ric Wheeler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090930194350.GA29166@mother.pipebreaker.pl \
--to=tomek@pipebreaker.pl \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.