From: "Hans-Peter Jansen" <hpj@urpla.net>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Poor interactive performance with I/O loads with fsync()ing
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 01:43:44 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
       Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Ben Gamari <bgamari.foss@gmail.com>,
       Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>, tytso@mit.edu, npiggin@suse.de,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Ruald Andreae <ruald.a@gmail.com>,
       Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>, Olly Betts <olly@survex.com>,
       martin f krafft <madduck@madduck.net>
References: <4b9fa440.12135e0a.7fc8.ffffe745@mx.google.com> <20100411184227.GL18855@one.firstfloor.org> <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004112332380.18009@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004112332380.18009@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <201004120143.45643.hpj@urpla.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1966
Lines: 44

On Sunday 11 April 2010, 23:54:34 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Apr 2010, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > XFS does not do much better. Just moved my VM images back to ext for
> > > that reason.
> >
> > Did you move from XFS to ext3?  ext3 defaults to barriers off, XFS on,
> > which can make a big difference depending on the disk. You can
> > disable them on XFS too of course, with the known drawbacks.
> >
> > XFS also typically needs some tuning to get reasonable log sizes.
> >
> > My point was merely (before people chime in with counter examples)
> > that XFS/btrfs/jfs don't suffer from the "need to sync all transactions
> > for every fsync" issue. There can (and will be) still other issues.
>
> Yes, I moved them back from XFS to ext3 simply because moving them
> from ext3 to XFS turned out to be a completely unusable disaster.
>
> I know that I can tweak knobs on XFS (or any other file system), but I
> would not have expected that it sucks that much for KVM with the
> default settings which are perfectly fine for the other use cases
> which made us move to XFS.

Thomas, what Andi was merely turning out, is that xfs has a really 
concerning different default: barriers, that hurts with fsync(). 

In order to make a fair comparison of the two, you may want to mount xfs 
with nobarrier or ext3 with barrier option set, and _then_ check which one 
is sucking less.

I guess, that outcome will be interesting for quite a bunch of people in the 
audience (including me?).

Pete

?) while in transition of getting rid of even suckier technology junk like
   VMware-Server - but digging out a current?, but _stable_ kernel release
   seems harder then ever nowadays. 
?) with operational VT-d support for kvm
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/