All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linda Walsh <xfs@tlinx.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Linux Block mailing list <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	XFS mailing list <xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
	Linux FS-Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: XFS and nobarrier with SSDs
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:44:55 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <567F2677.7040304@tlinx.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151214102750.GA29192@infradead.org>



Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The rule of thumb is: if nobarrier makes your workload run faster you
> should not be using it, aka: don't use it. 
----
	So what is the purpose of the switch if it is to only
be used when it makes no difference?

I.e. My raid controller does write-through if it's internal
battery needs replacing, otherwise, it does write-back.

On top of that my system is on a UPS that is good for a hour or more
of running.  

So, I used to use nobarrier on "work" disks where there were likely
to be alot of "writes".  Those disks are also backed up daily via
xfsdump/restore.  I figured those would benefit most, and at worst
I could restore to previous morning's backup.

Eventually stopped using the option, as for the most part, I couldn't
really measure any reliable difference in performance (which means
I should use it?!?).

Hmmm...

The only times I have experienced disk corruption on a single
disk were either back before I ever tried the option, or when
I had several months to a year where I tried to use software
RAID5 (several-10+ years ago, before it was possible to use
multiple cores for doing some RAID operations).

I doubt I'm going to try it again soon, but being told that
it's only "ok" to use an option when it makes no difference
in performance *sounds* more than a little confusing.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linda Walsh <xfs@tlinx.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Linux Block mailing list <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux FS-Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	XFS mailing list <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: XFS and nobarrier with SSDs
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:44:55 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <567F2677.7040304@tlinx.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151214102750.GA29192@infradead.org>



Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The rule of thumb is: if nobarrier makes your workload run faster you
> should not be using it, aka: don't use it. 
----
	So what is the purpose of the switch if it is to only
be used when it makes no difference?

I.e. My raid controller does write-through if it's internal
battery needs replacing, otherwise, it does write-back.

On top of that my system is on a UPS that is good for a hour or more
of running.  

So, I used to use nobarrier on "work" disks where there were likely
to be alot of "writes".  Those disks are also backed up daily via
xfsdump/restore.  I figured those would benefit most, and at worst
I could restore to previous morning's backup.

Eventually stopped using the option, as for the most part, I couldn't
really measure any reliable difference in performance (which means
I should use it?!?).

Hmmm...

The only times I have experienced disk corruption on a single
disk were either back before I ever tried the option, or when
I had several months to a year where I tried to use software
RAID5 (several-10+ years ago, before it was possible to use
multiple cores for doing some RAID operations).

I doubt I'm going to try it again soon, but being told that
it's only "ok" to use an option when it makes no difference
in performance *sounds* more than a little confusing.

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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-12-27  0:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-12 10:24 XFS and nobarrier with SSDs Georg Schönberger
2015-12-12 12:26 ` Martin Steigerwald
2015-12-14  6:43   ` Georg Schönberger
2015-12-14  8:38     ` Martin Steigerwald
2015-12-14  8:38       ` Martin Steigerwald
2015-12-14  9:58       ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-12-14  9:58         ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-12-14 10:18         ` Georg Schönberger
2015-12-14 10:18           ` Georg Schönberger
2015-12-14 10:27           ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-12-14 10:27             ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-12-14 10:34             ` Georg Schönberger
2015-12-14 10:34               ` Georg Schönberger
2015-12-14 13:36               ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-12-14 16:39               ` Eric Sandeen
2015-12-26 23:44             ` Linda Walsh [this message]
2015-12-26 23:44               ` Linda Walsh
2015-12-14 11:48 ` Emmanuel Florac

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=567F2677.7040304@tlinx.org \
    --to=xfs@tlinx.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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.