From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS Performance on NetApp
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:10:07 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101026231007.GA32255@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201010270033.35894@zmi.at>
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:33:35AM +0200, Michael Monnerie wrote:
> Does anybody have a report how XFS behaves on a NetApp storage with thin
> provisioning? They have a completely "weird" storage, their WAFL (write
> anywhere file layout) together with deduplication and other things make
> me think the best is to not-at-all specify any "performance options" in
> mkfs/mount, like sunit/swidth or largeio, swalloc, etc.
>
> Does someone have information on that?
Not about the Netapp as such.
However, as a general rule thin provisioned storage will have
unpredictable performance characteristics as the block
number/physical location correlation is meaningless.
e.g. because the log is one of the first things written to a thinly
provisioned volume during mkfs, it is unlikely to be physically
located in the middle of the volume. Indeed, there's no guarantee
that it will even be on the same spindles as the rest of the
filesystem, and it may be sharing spindles with some other thin
volume....
So, you are right in assuming that it is best not to tune your
filesystem to a specific physical geometry because there generally
isn't one for thinly provisioned volumes. However, options that
reduce filesystem fragmentation (e.g. allocsize) still have value in
keeping the amount of metadata and ptotential seeks down...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-26 23:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-26 22:33 XFS Performance on NetApp Michael Monnerie
2010-10-26 23:10 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2010-10-26 23:57 ` Michael Monnerie
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=20101026231007.GA32255@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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.