[OpenAFS] File systems on Linux, again.
Stephen Joyce
stephen@physics.unc.edu
Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:26:11 -0500 (EST)
When you have bonnie++ numbers for xfs /vicep partitions, please post them.
Mine are currently ext3, but I've warmed considerably to xfs since they
were installed.
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Jerry Normandin wrote:
> AFS on EXT3? No there are Metadata issues. EXT3 was intended for this.
> I inherited a mess here that I am fixing. My predecessor built is using
> Ext3 for the /vicepa filesystems. It takes a hell of a long time to
> create,
> Delete, or rename files. I tested with Bonnie++... here are my stats:
>
> Initial file performance baselines taken from ENG02 with 4096kbyte
> cache:
>
> read performance on disk is 6.7 x faster than AFS
> read performance on nfs is 2.0 x faser than AFS
>
> write performance is actually impressive. file creation and deletion
> are very slow on afs.
>
> file creation and deletion times is horrible. I will be working on a
> solution to solve this. Once file creation and deletion times are
> comparable to NFS, then AFS should perform well.
>
> Bonnie++ Benchmarks
>
> ENG02 AFS:
> Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> eng02.dafca.loca 8G 5296 47 6115 40 4074 34 19518 63 22494 7
> 125.6 4
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> 16 23 1 7777 79 23 0 23 1 4546 66
> 18 0
> eng02.dafca.local,8G,5296,47,6115,40,4074,34,19518,63,22494,7,125.6,4,16
> ,23,1,7777,79,23,0,23,1,4546,66,18,0
>
>
>
> ENG02 Local Disk:
>
> Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> eng02.dafca.loca 8G 35438 95 42686 23 16027 6 13516 31 24135 4
> 604.7 1
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> 16 2046 77 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 2230 84 +++++ +++
> 1461 17
> eng02.dafca.local,8G,35438,95,42686,23,16027,6,13516,31,24135,4,604.7,1,
> 16,2046,77,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,2230,84,+++++,+++,1461,17
>
>
>
> ENG02 NFS:
> Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> eng02.dafca.loca 8G 11051 27 11126 3 8944 5 11179 27 11186 2
> 118.1 0
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> 16 934 4 6092 12 2951 6 949 4 7922 12
> 2359 5
> eng02.dafca.local,8G,11051,27,11126,3,8944,5,11179,27,11186,2,118.1,0,16
> ,934,4,6092,12,2951,6,949,4,7922,12,2359,5
>
> So I have to backup the vicepa filesystems. Create a xfs filesystem.
> And restore. I've got 3TB of data to deal with.
>
> Trust me you do not want to use ext3 for the /vicepa file system!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: openafs-info-admin@openafs.org
> [mailto:openafs-info-admin@openafs.org] On Behalf Of Russ Allbery
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 2:36 PM
> To: openafs-info@openafs.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenAFS] File systems on Linux, again.
>
> "Smith, Matt" <matt.smith@uconn.edu> writes:
>
>> After the recent thread "openafs upgrade from 1.4.1 to 1.5.7", and a
>> review of a thread[1] from July, I'm wondering if there is a
> definitive
>> recommendation for which file system to use on Linux AFS file servers.
>> Ext3, XFS, JFS, something else?
>
> It shouldn't make much of a difference, so I think you're safe choosing
> your file system on whatever basis you'd choose a file system for any
> other file server. We use ext3 because of the stability, reliability,
> and
> "center of the mainstream" support in the kernel, which we always
> considered more important than a bit of additional speed, but your
> mileage
> may vary.
>
> XFS is probably the next most common choice.
>
> I would be very leery of ReiserFS. It has nice features, but the
> recovery
> tools are fairly horrific.
>
> --
> Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
> <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-info mailing list
> OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
> _______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-info mailing list
> OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
>