From: Lubos Kolouch <lubos.kolouch@gmail.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: extremely slow syncing on btrfs with 2.6.39.1
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:37:36 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <j0o870$u48$1@dough.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 4E1C096F.9020609@cn.fujitsu.com
Li Zefan, Tue, 12 Jul 2011 16:44:31 +0800:
>>>> I've been monitoring the lists for a while now but didn't see this
>>>> problem mentioned in particular: I've got a fairly standard desktop
>>>> system at home, 700gb WD drive, nothing special, with 2 btrfs
>>>> filesystems and some snapshots. The system runs for days, and I've
>>>> noticed unusual disk activity the other evening - turns out that it's
>>>> taking forever to sync().
>>>>
>>>> $ uname -r
>>>> 2.6.39.1
>>>> $ grep btrfs /proc/mounts
>>>> /dev/root / btrfs rw,relatime 0 0 # is /dev/sdb2 # /dev/sdb5 /home
>>>> btrfs rw,relatime 0 0 $ time sync
>>>>
>>>> real 1m5.552s
>>>> user 0m0.000s
>>>> sys 0m2.102s
>>>>
>>>> $ time sync
>>>>
>>>> real 1m16.830s
>>>> user 0m0.001s
>>>> sys 0m1.490s
>>>>
>>>> $ df -h / /home
>>>> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/root 47G
>>>> 33G 7.7G 82% / /dev/sdb5 652G 216G 421G 34% /home $ btrfs
>>>> fi df /
>>>> Data: total=35.48GB, used=29.86GB
>>>> System, DUP: total=16.00MB, used=12.00KB System: total=4.00MB,
>>>> used=0.00
>>>> Metadata, DUP: total=4.50GB, used=1.67GB
>>>> $ btrfs fi df /home
>>>> Data: total=310.01GB, used=209.53GB
>>>> System, DUP: total=8.00MB, used=48.00KB System: total=4.00MB,
>>>> used=0.00 Metadata, DUP: total=11.00GB, used=2.98GB Metadata:
>>>> total=8.00MB, used=0.00
>>>>
>>>> I'll switch to 3.0 soon, but, given the fact that we're going to be
>>>> running MeeGo on 2.6.39 probably for a while, I was wondering if
>>>> anyone knows off the top of their heads if this issue is
>>>> known/identified. If not then I'll need to make someone do some
>>>> patching ;).
>>>>
>>>> Auke
>>>
>>> You should read the thread "Abysmal Performance" of these mailing list
>>> from last month. They had a similar problem and downgraded to a 2.6.38
>>> kernel. By the way, that works for me too for the time being.
>>>
>>> Best Regards.
>>>
>>> Jan Stilow
>>
>> I had similar experience with two servers running on 2.6.39 - the
>> performance was terrible, after downgrade to 2.6.38 the speed is OK
>> again.
>>
>>
> Then you can turn to bisection to find out the culprit.
Well, I did not have chance to bisect yet, but this problem seems to be
gone with kernel 3.0
Thank you
Lubos
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-27 5:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-11 0:18 extremely slow syncing on btrfs with 2.6.39.1 Kok, Auke-jan H
2011-07-12 7:18 ` Jan Stilow
2011-07-12 7:52 ` Lubos Kolouch
2011-07-12 8:44 ` Li Zefan
2011-07-27 5:37 ` Lubos Kolouch [this message]
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='j0o870$u48$1@dough.gmane.org' \
--to=lubos.kolouch@gmail.com \
--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.