All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yann Dupont <Yann.Dupont@univ-nantes.fr>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Bad performance with XFS + 2.6.38 / 2.6.39
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:08:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EF1A224.2070508@univ-nantes.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACaf2ab-YjXAFm767MmRU5iuOmvkqQW3ZTfQewD5SGvF-opgYQ@mail.gmail.com>

Le 12/12/2011 03:00, Xupeng Yun a écrit :
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 09:00, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com
> <mailto:david@fromorbit.com>> wrote:
>
>     Oh, of course, now I remember what the problem is - it's a locking
>     issue that was fixed in 3.0.11, 3.1.5 and 3.2-rc1.
>
>
> Got it, thanks.
>
> --
> Xupeng Yun
> http://about.me/xupeng
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

I'm seeing more or less the same here.

Generally speaking XFS code in recent kernels seems to decrease CPU 
usage and be faster, which is a very good thing (good works, guy). But...

On two particular server, with recent kernels, I experience a much 
higher load than expected, but it's very hard to tell what's wrong. The 
system seems more in I/O wait. Older kernels (2.6.32.xx and 2.6.26.xx) 
gives better results.

Following this thread, I thought I have the same problems, but it's 
probably not the case, as I have tested 2.6.38.xx, 3.0.13, 3.1.5 with 
same results.

Thoses servers are mail (dovecot) servers, with lots of simultaneous 
imap clients (5000+) an lots of simultaneous message delivery.

These are linux-vservers, on top of LVM volumes. The storage is SAN with 
15k RPM SAS drives (and battery backup).

I know barriers were disabled in older kernels, so with recents kernels, 
XFS volumes were mounted with nobarrier.

As those servers are critical for us, I can't really test, hardly give 
you more precise numbers, and I don't know how to accurately reproduce 
this platform to test what's wrong. I know this is NOT a precise bug 
report and it won't help much.

All I can say IS :

- read operations seems no slower with recent kernels, backups take 
approximatively the same time ;
- I'd say (but I have no proof) that delivery of new mails takes more 
time and is more synchronous than before, like nobarrier have no effect.

Does this ring a bell to some of you ?

Thanks,
-- 
Yann Dupont - Service IRTS, DSI Université de Nantes
Tel : 02.53.48.49.20 - Mail/Jabber : Yann.Dupont@univ-nantes.fr

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-12-21  9:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-12-11 12:45 Bad performance with XFS + 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 Xupeng Yun
2011-12-11 23:39 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-12  0:40   ` Xupeng Yun
2011-12-12  1:00     ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-12  2:00       ` Xupeng Yun
2011-12-12 13:57         ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-12-21  9:08         ` Yann Dupont [this message]
2011-12-21 15:10           ` Stan Hoeppner
2011-12-21 17:56             ` Yann Dupont
2011-12-21 22:26               ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-22  9:23                 ` Yann Dupont
2011-12-22 11:02                   ` Yann Dupont
2012-01-02 10:06                     ` Yann Dupont
2012-01-02 16:08                       ` Peter Grandi
2012-01-02 18:02                         ` Peter Grandi
2012-01-04 10:54                         ` Yann Dupont
2012-01-02 20:35                       ` Dave Chinner
2012-01-03  8:20                         ` Yann Dupont
2012-01-04 12:33                           ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-01-04 13:06                             ` Yann Dupont

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=4EF1A224.2070508@univ-nantes.fr \
    --to=yann.dupont@univ-nantes.fr \
    --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.