Re: Very slow file write/create operations

Frank Wille <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.netbsd.general
Organization Privates Internet Ostwestfalen/Lippe e.V.
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Robert Elz wrote:

> | 2. Shouldn't the user- and sys-times more or less add into "real"
> | Where did the system waste all that time?
> 
> Waiting for something to finish.   With your tests, I'd guess that
> is synchronous writes to the ciss raid array - which are (by default)
>  used for all metadata operations
 > [...]
> If you can make a new filesystem on the raid (it should not need to 
> be very big, use twice the size of du /etc (get the units correct)
> as a rough estimate), and mount that one -o async and repeat the test
> copying /etc onto that (new) filesystem.

As I now understand synchronous writes are the default, unless I specify 
-o async. Then the negative effect of synchronous writes is especially 
visible with RAID configurations? Otherwise I should have noticed that 
before.

Anyway, I didn't make the -o async test yet, because it requires adding 
more disks, or making the swap partition smaller. But I noticed that I 
didn't change the file system to WAPBL after installation!

So I added the "log" option in /etc/fstab, rebooted and repeated the test:

# time cp -Rp /etc /root
         0.05 real         0.00 user         0.05 sys
# time rm -rf /root/etc
         0.01 real         0.00 user         0.01 sys

That's what I would expect! The extreme delay is gone. I can even add a 
sync and it's still factor 20:

# time cp -Rp /etc /root; time sync
         0.05 real         0.00 user         0.04 sys
         1.14 real         0.00 user         0.00 sys
# time rm -rf /root/etc; time sync
         0.01 real         0.00 user         0.01 sys
         0.26 real         0.00 user         0.00 sys

This matches, or is even a little faster, than the old server.
Thanks.

-- 
Frank Wille
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.