Re: v3 logging speedups for 2.6
On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 02:07, Jens Benecke wrote: Chris Mason wrote: Hello everyone, This is part one of the data logging port to 2.6, it includes all the cleanups and journal performance fixes. Basically, it's everything except the data=journal and data=ordered changes. ftp.suse.com/pub/people/mason/patches/data-logging experimental/2.6.0-test11 Hi, Does it make sense to apply those to 2.6.1-mm2? Not those at least, since I managed to screw up the diff. I've got a 2.6.1 directory under experimental now with better patches. I'm checking now to see if they apply to -mm2. Does except the data=ordered changes mean that data journalling ist _not_ in there, or that that data journalling is there but hasn't been updated to what is there for 2.4.x yet? Correct, but I'm almost there. Thing got off track a lot during xmas break. -chris
Re: v3 logging speedups for 2.6
Am Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2003 19:42 schrieb Chris Mason: On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 13:30, Dieter Nützel wrote: Am Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2003 19:10 schrieb Chris Mason: Hello everyone, This is part one of the data logging port to 2.6, it includes all the cleanups and journal performance fixes. Basically, it's everything except the data=journal and data=ordered changes. The 2.6 merge has a few new things as well, I've changed things around so that metadata and log blocks will go onto the system dirty lists. This should make it easier to improve log performance, since most of the work will be done outside the journal locks. The code works for me, but should be considered highly experimental. In general, it is significantly faster than vanilla 2.6.0-test11, I've done tests with dbench, iozone, synctest and a few others. streaming writes didn't see much improvement (they were already at disk speeds), but most other tests did. Anyway, for the truly daring among you: ftp.suse.com/pub/people/mason/patches/data-logging/experimental/2.6.0-t est11 The more bug reports I get now, the faster I'll be able to stabilize things. Get the latest reiserfsck and check your disks after each use. Chris, with which kernel should I start on my SuSE 9.0? A special SuSE 2.6.0-test11 + data logging? Or plane native? --- There are such much patches in SuSE kernels... For the moment you can only try it on vanilla 2.6.0-test11. The suse 2.6 rpms have acls/xattrs and the new logging stuff won't apply. Jeff and I will fix that when the logging merge is really complete. At the rate I'm going, that should be by the end of next week, this part of the merge was the really tricky bits. Chris, can we have something against Gerd Knorr's [EMAIL PROTECTED] SuSE 2.6.1 kernel version, please? reiserfs-journal-writer Works fine (applies), still compiling...;-) reiserfs-logging Show some rejects: SunWave1 src/linux# patch -p1 -E -N ../patches/reiserfs-logging patching file fs/reiserfs/journal.c Hunk #38 FAILED at 2217. Hunk #39 succeeded at 2256 (offset 3 lines). Hunk #40 FAILED at 2294. Hunk #41 succeeded at 2423 with fuzz 1 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #42 succeeded at 2438 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #43 succeeded at 2456 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #44 succeeded at 2480 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #45 succeeded at 2519 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #46 succeeded at 2581 (offset 56 lines). Hunk #47 succeeded at 2606 (offset 56 lines). Hunk #48 succeeded at 2657 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #49 succeeded at 2727 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #50 succeeded at 2744 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #51 succeeded at 2754 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #52 succeeded at 2792 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #53 succeeded at 2832 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #54 succeeded at 2856 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #55 succeeded at 2888 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #56 succeeded at 2897 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #57 succeeded at 2985 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #58 FAILED at 3036. Hunk #59 succeeded at 3062 (offset 64 lines). Hunk #60 succeeded at 3096 with fuzz 1 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #61 succeeded at 3113 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #62 succeeded at 3147 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #63 succeeded at 3163 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #64 succeeded at 3176 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #65 succeeded at 3183 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #66 succeeded at 3219 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #67 succeeded at 3241 (offset 67 lines). 3 out of 67 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/reiserfs/journal.c.rej patching file fs/reiserfs/objectid.c patching file fs/reiserfs/super.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 61 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 90 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 844 with fuzz 1 (offset 35 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 862 with fuzz 2 (offset 37 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 1442 with fuzz 1 (offset 47 lines). patching file fs/reiserfs/ibalance.c patching file fs/reiserfs/procfs.c patching file fs/reiserfs/fix_node.c patching file fs/reiserfs/inode.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 960. Hunk #2 succeeded at 1629 (offset 12 lines). 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/reiserfs/inode.c.rej patching file fs/reiserfs/do_balan.c patching file mm/page-writeback.c patching file include/linux/reiserfs_fs_i.h Hunk #2 FAILED at 50. 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file include/linux/reiserfs_fs_i.h.rej patching file include/linux/reiserfs_fs_sb.h Hunk #1 succeeded at 107 (offset 1 line). Hunk #2 succeeded at 121 (offset 1 line). Hunk #3 FAILED at 155. Hunk #4 succeeded at 166 (offset 5 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 207 (offset 5 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 228 (offset 5 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 421 (offset 9 lines). Hunk #8 succeeded at 491 (offset 24 lines). Hunk #9 succeeded at 500 (offset 24 lines). 1 out of 9 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file include/linux/reiserfs_fs_sb.h.rej patching file include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h I haven't the time to do it myself, today... -- Dieter Nützel @home: Dieter.Nuetzel () hamburg ! de
Re: v3 logging speedups for 2.6
Am Montag, 12. Januar 2004 21:08 schrieb Dieter Nützel: Am Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2003 19:42 schrieb Chris Mason: On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 13:30, Dieter Nützel wrote: Am Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2003 19:10 schrieb Chris Mason: Hello everyone, This is part one of the data logging port to 2.6, it includes all the cleanups and journal performance fixes. Basically, it's everything except the data=journal and data=ordered changes. The 2.6 merge has a few new things as well, I've changed things around so that metadata and log blocks will go onto the system dirty lists. This should make it easier to improve log performance, since most of the work will be done outside the journal locks. The code works for me, but should be considered highly experimental. In general, it is significantly faster than vanilla 2.6.0-test11, I've done tests with dbench, iozone, synctest and a few others. streaming writes didn't see much improvement (they were already at disk speeds), but most other tests did. Anyway, for the truly daring among you: ftp.suse.com/pub/people/mason/patches/data-logging/experimental/2.6.0 -t est11 The more bug reports I get now, the faster I'll be able to stabilize things. Get the latest reiserfsck and check your disks after each use. Chris, with which kernel should I start on my SuSE 9.0? A special SuSE 2.6.0-test11 + data logging? Or plane native? --- There are such much patches in SuSE kernels... For the moment you can only try it on vanilla 2.6.0-test11. The suse 2.6 rpms have acls/xattrs and the new logging stuff won't apply. Jeff and I will fix that when the logging merge is really complete. At the rate I'm going, that should be by the end of next week, this part of the merge was the really tricky bits. Chris, can we have something against Gerd Knorr's [EMAIL PROTECTED] SuSE 2.6.1 kernel version, please? reiserfs-journal-writer Works fine (applies), still compiling...;-) Works fine! Greetings, Dieter reiserfs-logging Show some rejects: SunWave1 src/linux# patch -p1 -E -N ../patches/reiserfs-logging patching file fs/reiserfs/journal.c Hunk #38 FAILED at 2217. Hunk #39 succeeded at 2256 (offset 3 lines). Hunk #40 FAILED at 2294. Hunk #41 succeeded at 2423 with fuzz 1 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #42 succeeded at 2438 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #43 succeeded at 2456 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #44 succeeded at 2480 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #45 succeeded at 2519 (offset 40 lines). Hunk #46 succeeded at 2581 (offset 56 lines). Hunk #47 succeeded at 2606 (offset 56 lines). Hunk #48 succeeded at 2657 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #49 succeeded at 2727 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #50 succeeded at 2744 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #51 succeeded at 2754 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #52 succeeded at 2792 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #53 succeeded at 2832 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #54 succeeded at 2856 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #55 succeeded at 2888 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #56 succeeded at 2897 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #57 succeeded at 2985 (offset 60 lines). Hunk #58 FAILED at 3036. Hunk #59 succeeded at 3062 (offset 64 lines). Hunk #60 succeeded at 3096 with fuzz 1 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #61 succeeded at 3113 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #62 succeeded at 3147 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #63 succeeded at 3163 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #64 succeeded at 3176 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #65 succeeded at 3183 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #66 succeeded at 3219 (offset 67 lines). Hunk #67 succeeded at 3241 (offset 67 lines). 3 out of 67 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/reiserfs/journal.c.rej patching file fs/reiserfs/objectid.c patching file fs/reiserfs/super.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 61 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 90 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 844 with fuzz 1 (offset 35 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 862 with fuzz 2 (offset 37 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 1442 with fuzz 1 (offset 47 lines). patching file fs/reiserfs/ibalance.c patching file fs/reiserfs/procfs.c patching file fs/reiserfs/fix_node.c patching file fs/reiserfs/inode.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 960. Hunk #2 succeeded at 1629 (offset 12 lines). 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/reiserfs/inode.c.rej patching file fs/reiserfs/do_balan.c patching file mm/page-writeback.c patching file include/linux/reiserfs_fs_i.h Hunk #2 FAILED at 50. 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file include/linux/reiserfs_fs_i.h.rej patching file include/linux/reiserfs_fs_sb.h Hunk #1 succeeded at 107 (offset 1 line). Hunk #2 succeeded at 121 (offset 1 line). Hunk #3 FAILED at 155. Hunk #4 succeeded at 166 (offset 5 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 207 (offset 5 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 228 (offset 5 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 421 (offset 9 lines). Hunk #8 succeeded at 491 (offset 24 lines). Hunk #9 succeeded at 500 (offset 24 lines). 1 out of 9 hunks FAILED -- saving
v3 logging speedups for 2.6
Hello everyone, This is part one of the data logging port to 2.6, it includes all the cleanups and journal performance fixes. Basically, it's everything except the data=journal and data=ordered changes. The 2.6 merge has a few new things as well, I've changed things around so that metadata and log blocks will go onto the system dirty lists. This should make it easier to improve log performance, since most of the work will be done outside the journal locks. The code works for me, but should be considered highly experimental. In general, it is significantly faster than vanilla 2.6.0-test11, I've done tests with dbench, iozone, synctest and a few others. streaming writes didn't see much improvement (they were already at disk speeds), but most other tests did. Anyway, for the truly daring among you: ftp.suse.com/pub/people/mason/patches/data-logging/experimental/2.6.0-test11 The more bug reports I get now, the faster I'll be able to stabilize things. Get the latest reiserfsck and check your disks after each use. -chris
Re: v3 logging speedups for 2.6
Am Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2003 19:10 schrieb Chris Mason: Hello everyone, This is part one of the data logging port to 2.6, it includes all the cleanups and journal performance fixes. Basically, it's everything except the data=journal and data=ordered changes. The 2.6 merge has a few new things as well, I've changed things around so that metadata and log blocks will go onto the system dirty lists. This should make it easier to improve log performance, since most of the work will be done outside the journal locks. The code works for me, but should be considered highly experimental. In general, it is significantly faster than vanilla 2.6.0-test11, I've done tests with dbench, iozone, synctest and a few others. streaming writes didn't see much improvement (they were already at disk speeds), but most other tests did. Anyway, for the truly daring among you: ftp.suse.com/pub/people/mason/patches/data-logging/experimental/2.6.0-test11 The more bug reports I get now, the faster I'll be able to stabilize things. Get the latest reiserfsck and check your disks after each use. Chris, with which kernel should I start on my SuSE 9.0? A special SuSE 2.6.0-test11 + data logging? Or plane native? --- There are such much patches in SuSE kernels... Greetings, Dieter -- Dieter Nützel @home: Dieter.Nuetzel () hamburg ! de
Re: v3 logging speedups for 2.6
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 13:30, Dieter Nützel wrote: Am Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2003 19:10 schrieb Chris Mason: Hello everyone, This is part one of the data logging port to 2.6, it includes all the cleanups and journal performance fixes. Basically, it's everything except the data=journal and data=ordered changes. The 2.6 merge has a few new things as well, I've changed things around so that metadata and log blocks will go onto the system dirty lists. This should make it easier to improve log performance, since most of the work will be done outside the journal locks. The code works for me, but should be considered highly experimental. In general, it is significantly faster than vanilla 2.6.0-test11, I've done tests with dbench, iozone, synctest and a few others. streaming writes didn't see much improvement (they were already at disk speeds), but most other tests did. Anyway, for the truly daring among you: ftp.suse.com/pub/people/mason/patches/data-logging/experimental/2.6.0-test11 The more bug reports I get now, the faster I'll be able to stabilize things. Get the latest reiserfsck and check your disks after each use. Chris, with which kernel should I start on my SuSE 9.0? A special SuSE 2.6.0-test11 + data logging? Or plane native? --- There are such much patches in SuSE kernels... For the moment you can only try it on vanilla 2.6.0-test11. The suse 2.6 rpms have acls/xattrs and the new logging stuff won't apply. Jeff and I will fix that when the logging merge is really complete. At the rate I'm going, that should be by the end of next week, this part of the merge was the really tricky bits. -chris
