| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:18:23 +0100 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org>, LKML <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: very poor ext3 write performance on big filesystems? On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 09:16:41AM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > ext3 tries to keep inodes in the same block group as their containing > directory. If you have lots of hard links, obviously it can't really > do that, especially since we don't have a good way at mkdir time to > tell the filesystem, "Psst! This is going to be a hard link clone of > that directory over there, put it in the same block group". Hmm, you think such a hint interface would be worth it? > > > What has helped a bit was to recreate the file system with -O^dir_index > > dir_index seems to cause more seeks. > > Part of it may have simply been recreating the filesystem, not Undoubtedly. > necessarily removing the dir_index feature. Dir_index speeds up > individual lookups, but it slows down workloads that do a readdir But only for large directories right? For kernel source like directory sizes it seems to be a general loss. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists