[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C533DB0.5020608@uni-konstanz.de>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 23:01:36 +0200
From: Kay Diederichs <kay.diederichs@...-konstanz.de>
To: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Karsten Schaefer <karsten.schaefer@...-konstanz.de>
Subject: Re: ext4 performance regression 2.6.27-stable versus 2.6.32 and later
Am 30.07.2010 04:20, schrieb Ted Ts'o:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 09:51:48PM +0200, Kay Diederichs wrote:
>>
>> When looking at the I/O statistics while the benchmark is running, we
>> see very choppy patterns for 2.6.32, but quite smooth stats for
>> 2.6.27-stable.
>
> Could you try to do two things for me? Using (preferably from a
> recent e2fsprogs, such as 1.41.11 or 12) run filefrag -v on the files
> created from your 2.6.27 run and your 2.6.32 run?
>
> Secondly can capture blktrace results from 2.6.27 and 2.6.32? That
> would be very helpful to understand what might be going on.
>
> Either would be helpful; both would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Ted
Ted,
a typical example of filefrag -v output for 2.6.27.48 is
Filesystem type is: ef53
File size of /mnt/md5/scratch/nfs-test/tmp/xds/frames/h2g28_1_00000.cbf
is 6229688 (1521 blocks, blocksize 4096)
ext logical physical expected length flags
0 0 796160000 1024
1 1024 826381312 796161023 497 eof
(99 out of 100 files have 2 extents)
whereas for 2.6.32.16 the result is typically
Filesystem type is: ef53
File size of /mnt/md5/scratch/nfs-test/tmp/xds/frames/h2g28_1_00000.cbf
is 6229688 (1521 blocks, blocksize 4096)
ext logical physical expected length flags
0 0 826376200 1521 eof
/mnt/md5/scratch/nfs-test/tmp/xds/frames/h2g28_1_00000.cbf: 1 extent found
(99 out of 100 files have 1 extent)
We'll try the blktrace ASAP and report back.
thanks,
Kay
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5236 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists