Now with a little larger fs (257G used, backed by HDD), the result is
much more obvious:
$ sudo perf ftrace -t function_graph \
-T open_ctree \
-T btrfs_read_block_groups \
-T check_chunk_block_group_mappings \
-T btrfs_re
On 2018/12/5 下午2:55, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 4.12.18 г. 22:14 ч., Wilson, Ellis wrote:
>> On 12/4/18 8:07 AM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>> On 3.12.18 г. 20:20 ч., Wilson, Ellis wrote:
With 14TB drives available today, it doesn't take more than a handful of
drives to result in a
On 4.12.18 г. 22:14 ч., Wilson, Ellis wrote:
> On 12/4/18 8:07 AM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> On 3.12.18 г. 20:20 ч., Wilson, Ellis wrote:
>>> With 14TB drives available today, it doesn't take more than a handful of
>>> drives to result in a filesystem that takes around a minute to mount.
>>> As
On 12/4/18 8:07 AM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> On 3.12.18 г. 20:20 ч., Wilson, Ellis wrote:
>> With 14TB drives available today, it doesn't take more than a handful of
>> drives to result in a filesystem that takes around a minute to mount.
>> As a result of this, I suspect this will become an increa
Le 03/12/2018 à 23:22, Hans van Kranenburg a écrit :
> [...]
> Yes, I think that's true. See btrfs_read_block_groups in extent-tree.c:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c#n9982
>
> What the code is doing here is starting at the beginnin
Le 04/12/2018 à 03:52, Chris Murphy a écrit :
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 1:04 PM Lionel Bouton
> wrote:
>> Le 03/12/2018 à 20:56, Lionel Bouton a écrit :
>>> [...]
>>> Note : recently I tried upgrading from 4.9 to 4.14 kernels, various
>>> tuning of the io queue (switching between classic io-schedul
On 2018/12/4 下午9:07, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 3.12.18 г. 20:20 ч., Wilson, Ellis wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Many months ago I promised to graph how long it took to mount a BTRFS
>> filesystem as it grows. I finally had (made) time for this, and the
>> attached is the result of my testin
On 3.12.18 г. 20:20 ч., Wilson, Ellis wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Many months ago I promised to graph how long it took to mount a BTRFS
> filesystem as it grows. I finally had (made) time for this, and the
> attached is the result of my testing. The image is a fairly
> self-explanatory graph, and
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 1:04 PM Lionel Bouton
wrote:
>
> Le 03/12/2018 à 20:56, Lionel Bouton a écrit :
> > [...]
> > Note : recently I tried upgrading from 4.9 to 4.14 kernels, various
> > tuning of the io queue (switching between classic io-schedulers and
> > blk-mq ones in the virtual machines)
On 2018/12/4 上午2:20, Wilson, Ellis wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Many months ago I promised to graph how long it took to mount a BTRFS
> filesystem as it grows. I finally had (made) time for this, and the
> attached is the result of my testing. The image is a fairly
> self-explanatory graph, and the
Hi,
On 12/3/18 8:56 PM, Lionel Bouton wrote:
>
> Le 03/12/2018 à 19:20, Wilson, Ellis a écrit :
>>
>> Many months ago I promised to graph how long it took to mount a BTRFS
>> filesystem as it grows. I finally had (made) time for this, and the
>> attached is the result of my testing. The image
Le 03/12/2018 à 20:56, Lionel Bouton a écrit :
> [...]
> Note : recently I tried upgrading from 4.9 to 4.14 kernels, various
> tuning of the io queue (switching between classic io-schedulers and
> blk-mq ones in the virtual machines) and BTRFS mount options
> (space_cache=v2,ssd_spread) but there w
Hi,
Le 03/12/2018 à 19:20, Wilson, Ellis a écrit :
> Hi all,
>
> Many months ago I promised to graph how long it took to mount a BTRFS
> filesystem as it grows. I finally had (made) time for this, and the
> attached is the result of my testing. The image is a fairly
> self-explanatory graph,
Hi all,
Many months ago I promised to graph how long it took to mount a BTRFS
filesystem as it grows. I finally had (made) time for this, and the
attached is the result of my testing. The image is a fairly
self-explanatory graph, and the raw data is also attached in
comma-delimited format fo
14 matches
Mail list logo