[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: ext3 performance issue with a Berkeley db application
- From: Greg Louis <glouis dynamicro on ca>
- To: Matthias Andree <ma+ext3 dt e-technik uni-dortmund de>
- Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm digeo com>, matthias andree gmx de,ext3-users redhat com
- Subject: Re: ext3 performance issue with a Berkeley db application
- Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 07:08:03 -0500
On 20030204 (Tue) at 0212:14 +0100, Matthias Andree wrote:
>
> > My recommendation is to work out why the application is performing so much
> > overwriting, and make it stop.
>
> Yup, make ext3 on IDE stop this high write rate. =:->
>
> Seriously, as long as ext3 + IDE is a problem and ext2 + IDE isn't (with
> 2.4 at least), reiserfs + IDE isn't, ext3 + SCSI isn't, there's no
> compelling reason to change the application code.
I get a different result: the comparison I sent initially among
ordered/journal/writeback was done on a _SCSI_ drive. Building with
bogofilter from randlist.txt with data=journal takes my laptop/IDE 27
minutes and my tower/SCSI 26 and a half. So I would be inclined to
doubt that the solution may reside in anything IDE-related.
On my laptop, simbf takes 8m 14s (ext3, data=ordered). On the SCSI
drive mentioned above, with ext3, data=writeback, 18 seconds flat.
With ext3, data=journal, it was 3/4 done when I executed
while true; do kill -9 (simbf process); done -- the only way -- at ten
minutes; it had completely locked up access to the drive and wasn't
interested in ctrl-C. With ext3, data=ordered, simbf completed in 7
minutes and 8 seconds. With ext2, 13.7 seconds. Again, this was a
SCSI drive.
Sorry I didn't get to this last night.
--
| G r e g L o u i s | gpg public key: |
| http://www.bgl.nu/~glouis | finger greg bgl nu |
| Help free our mailboxes. Include |
| http://wecanstopspam.org in your signature. |
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]