Re: Why is the performance of my lvmthin snapshot so poor
Gionatan Danti <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.lvm.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Il 2022-06-16 09:53 Demi Marie Obenour ha scritto: > That seems reasonable. My conclusion is that dm-thin (which is what > LVM > uses) is not a good fit for workloads with a lot of small random writes > and frequent snapshots, due to the 64k minimum chunk size. This also > explains why dm-thin does not allow smaller blocks: not only would it > only support very small thin pools, it would also have massive metadata > write overhead. Hopefully dm-thin v2 will improve the situation. I think that, in this case, no free lunch really exists. I tried the following thin provisioning methods, each with its strong & weak points: lvmthin: probably the more flexible of the mainline kernel options. You pay for r/m/w only when allocating a small block (say 4K) the first time after taking a snapshot. It is fast and well integrated with lvm command line. Con: bad behavior on out-of-space condition xfs + reflink: a great, simple to use tool when applicable. It has a very small granularity (4K) with no r/m/w. Cons: requires fine tuning for good performance when reflinking big files; IO freezes during metadata copy for reflink; a very small granularity means sequential IO is going to suffer heavily (see here for more details: https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=157891132109888&w=2) btrfs: very small granularity (4K) and many integrated features. Cons: bad performance overall, especially when using mechanical HDD vdo: is provides small granularity (4K) thin provisioning, compression and deduplication. Cons: (still) out-of-tree; requires a powerloss protected writeback cache to maintain good performance; no snapshot capability zfs: designed for the ground up for pervasive CoW, with many features and ARC/L2ARC. Cons: out-of-tree; using small granularity (4K) means bad overall performance; using big granularity (128K by default) is a necessary compromise for most HDD pools. For what it is worth, I settled on ZFS when using out-of-tree modules is not an issue and lvmthin otherwise (but I plan to use xfs + reflink more in the future). Do you have any information to share about dm-thin v2? I heard about it some years ago, but I found no recent info. Regards. -- Danti Gionatan Supporto Tecnico Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it email: [email protected] - [email protected] GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8 _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list [email protected] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/