Reiserfs vs XFS .. Now : How to improve IO disk speed.

Jimmy Christensen jimmy at ghost.dk
Wed Apr 12 04:03:18 CDT 2006


How much memory does the server have? Xfs is quite memory happy which is 
one of it's strongest points. The more memory it has the better it is to 
write the files in order. The solid state for the journaling also sounds 
like a good idea.

Jean-Francois Bouchard wrote:
> To give more info : we got 14 disk of 300 GB 10K , RAID 5 config. That 
> is linked with 2 U320 to our file server.
> 
> We use the array as a DB server, I mean, a lots of little file that 
> contain what should be in a real DB .. Yes I know , we should use a real 
> DB system .. But when you got everything setup .. You don't want to 
> change things.
> 
> We have 2 idea to speedup things :
> 
> 1- Buy a solid state HD and put the XFS journal on it.
> 
> 2- Do an other File server that will split the load .. (Also more ram 
> for cache)
> 
> Those idea are good ? solid state disk, someone have experience with that ?
> 
> 
> PS : I'm not sure about the strip size .. Will check later.
> 
> 
> Jean-Francois Bouchard
> Idilia inc.
> 
> 
> PMilanese at nypl.org wrote:
>> I agree that filesystem choice may not help much. Don't think there's much
>> to index in a flat directory.
>>
>> I do not recall you stating what the 220 was hooked up to, or how it was
>> setup. You said it was a bunch of 300g disks is all. Is it setup RAID3?
>> What about stripe sizes? Is that set appropriately? All firmware is up to
>> date?
>>
>> What type of processing is your application doing? Are there any other
>> variables involved?
>>
>> You are looking at undergoing something which will likely not pay off. Are
>> there other areas to look at, or should we assume that you have done this?
>>
>>
>> Thanks-
>>
>> Peter J. Milanese, System Administrator
>> Information Technology Group
>> The New York Public Library
>> peterm at nypl.org - 212.621.0203
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>                                                                            
>>              Jonathan Dill                                                 
>>              <jonathan at nerds.n                                             
>>              et>                                                        To 
>>              Sent by:                  Jean-Francois Bouchard              
>>              linux-poweredge-b         <jean-francois.bouchard at idilia.com> 
>>              ounces at dell.com                                            cc 
>>                                        linux-poweredge at lists.us.dell.com   
>>                                                                    Subject 
>>              04/11/2006 01:32          Re: Reiserfs vs XFS                 
>>              PM                                                            
>>                                                                            
>>                                                                            
>>                                                                            
>>                                                                            
>>                                                                            
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jean-Francois Bouchard wrote:
>>   
>>> Interesting !
>>>
>>> Still, I'm looking for someone that did the test betwen XFS and ReiserFS
>>> .. Iknow that XFS is balanced for performance (right now , we have a
>>> performance issue ..)
>>>
>>>     
>> Good luck with that, unfortunately probably the only reliable thing to
>> do is to try it yourself, or at least give some more details about the
>> specific application.  I am skeptical that XFS vs. ReiserFS is going to
>> make much of a performance difference--I did some benchmarks with
>> bonnie++ and large file sizes and the difference was not significant,
>> but that may not be relevant to your application with lots of small files.
>>
>> Instead, I would look at splitting the load between servers if possible,
>> different RAID configurations, or maybe SAN depending on the
>> application, or at least try to figure out what is the real bottleneck.
>> I don't think changing the filesystem is going to make much difference.
>>
>> XFS does have a feature to store small files inside of inodes, which
>> theoretically could give it a performance advantage for lots of small
>> files, but ReiserFS may have a similar feature.
>>
>> One advantage XFS does have is xfsdump for backups, which puts much less
>> load on the system vs. gnutar for example, also it is supposed to be
>> safe for backing up an active filesystem.
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-PowerEdge mailing list
>> Linux-PowerEdge at dell.com
>> http://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-poweredge
>> Please read the FAQ at http://lists.us.dell.com/faq
>>
>>
>>
>>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-PowerEdge mailing list
> Linux-PowerEdge at dell.com
> http://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-poweredge
> Please read the FAQ at http://lists.us.dell.com/faq



More information about the Linux-PowerEdge mailing list