Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012 schrieb Liu Bo:
> On 09/19/2012 07:28 PM, ching wrote:
[…]
> > On 09/17/2012 07:15 PM, ching wrote:
> >> I am testing btrfs for long-term storage and backup, and i would
> >> like to know more about "autodefrag" option:
> >>
> >> 1. Will "autodefrag" option benefit ssd?
> >>
> >> My understanding is:
> >>
> >> autodrag -> number of extent decrease -> metadata decrease ->
> >>a
> >>
> >> "healthier" filesystem in the long run
> >>
> >> (P.S. I am aware that autodefrag will introduce extra write I/O)
>
> Yes, your understanding is right, random write workloads will benefit
> from it.
What about the extra I/O? And the greatly reduced seek times on SSDs?
Upto now I kept away from defragmenting on SSD.
I wonder about a good way to decide whether autodefrag makes things better
or worse for a specific workload. What are the criteria on rotating media
and what are they on SSD?
[… informational part about a BTRFS on SSD that should have an age of at
least 8 months with almost daily upgrades …]
I only have / running on SSD, but this since quite some time. And it does
not seem to have gotten much worse – however this is only subjective
feeling of performance.
Except for fstrim times. fstrim take way more time than in the beginning¹.
So there seems to be free space fragmentation. Which makes sense for a
root filesystem on a Debian Sid machine with lots of upgrade activity and
way over 50% usage.
merkaba:~> df -hT /
Dateisystem Typ Größe Benutzt Verf. Verw% Eingehängt auf
/dev/dm-0 btrfs 19G 13G 3,6G 79% /
merkaba:~> btrfs fi sh
failed to read /dev/sr0
Label: 'debian' uuid: […]
Total devices 1 FS bytes used 12.25GB
devid 1 size 18.62GB used 18.62GB path /dev/dm-0
merkaba:~> btrfs fi df /
Data: total=15.10GB, used=11.58GB
System, DUP: total=8.00MB, used=4.00KB
System: total=4.00MB, used=0.00
Metadata, DUP: total=1.75GB, used=688.96MB
Metadata: total=8.00MB, used=0.00
I think I get rid of that duplicate metadata once I redo the fs with 8 or
16 KiB metadata blocks.
I thought about rebalancing it, but last time boot time doubled after a
complete rebalance. The effect of a rebalance of just the metadata tree to
one instead of two might be different tough.
Intel SSD 320 300GB on Kernel 3.6-rc5.
[1] It has been a second or two in the beginning I think. Then it grew
over time.
merkaba:~> time fstrim -v /
/: 5877809152 bytes were trimmed
fstrim -v / 0,00s user 5,74s system 14% cpu 39,920 total
merkaba:~> time fstrim -v /
/: 5875712000 bytes were trimmed
fstrim -v / 0,00s user 5,55s system 14% cpu 39,095 total
merkaba:~> time fstrim -v /
/: 5875712000 bytes were trimmed
fstrim -v / 0,00s user 5,62s system 14% cpu 38,538 total
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
--
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
