Re: New performance results

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 05:01:11PM -0500, Steven Pratt wrote:
> I am continuing to do runs to provide more data on the random write  
> issues with btrfs. I have just posted 2 sets of runs here:
> http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/longrun/
>
> these are on a pull of the btrfs-unstable experimental branch from 4/3.
>
> These are 100 minute runs of the 128 thread random write workload on the  
> raid system (1 for btrfs and 1 for ext3).  Included in these runs are  
> graphs of all the iostat, sar and mpstat data (see analysis directories).
>
> A couple of interesting things. First, we see the choppiness of the IO  
> in btrfs compared to ext3.
 
> http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/longrun/btrfs-longrun/btrfs1.ffsb.random_writes__threads_0128.09-04-06_10.25.03/analysis/iostat-processed.001/chart.html 
> 
>
 
> http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/longrun/ext3-longrun/btrfs1.ffsb.random_writes__threads_0128.09-04-06_13.44.49/analysis/iostat-processed.001/chart.html 
> 
>
>
> In particular look at graphs 7 and 11 which show write iops and  
> throughput.  Ext3 is nice and smooth, while btrfs has a repeating  
> pattern of dips and spikes, with IO going to 0 on  a regular basis.
>
> Another interesting observation is what looks a lot like a memory leak.   
> Looking at chart 6 Memory at :
 
> http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/longrun/btrfs-longrun/btrfs1.ffsb.random_writes__threads_0128.09-04-06_10.25.03/analysis/sar-processed.001/chart.html 
> 
>
> we see that the amount of page cache drops slowly throughout the entire  
> run.  Starting up around 3.5GB and dropping to about 2.3GB by the end of  
> the run.  The memory seems to have moved to the slab which grew to  
> 1.5GB.  Doing a repeat of the run while watching slabtop, we see that  
> size-2048 is responsible for the majority of the slab usage (over 1GB).
>
> We do not see this behavior under ext3.

Yeah, which tree are you running against?  I had this problem a few weeks ago,
but I don't remember if it was fixed or anything usefull like that, it may be
worth it to try running against the newest stuff.  Thanks,

Josef
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux