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

Jean-Francois Bouchard jean-francois.bouchard at idilia.com
Wed Apr 12 06:44:37 CDT 2006


Colossus (The name of the file server) got 8 gigd of ram .. We are stuck 
at this size (or near that size) because its a 32 bits machine.

Jimmy Christensen wrote:
> 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
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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