There are a number of factors in play here. btrfs is not production
ready in the Maverick kernels, it is slow in general and very slow in
the face of an fsync centric load. Btrfs was enabled in the installer
as an experimental feature, as a technology preview, and as such it is
not likely anyone
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 17:36 +, James Lewis wrote:
> If this is as a result of dpkg calling "fsync" a lot, un-necessarily...
> then perhaps we should consider this partly an issue with dpkg as well
> as with btrfs?... I might even go so far as to say that it could be
> described as a bug in othe
Probably Arne Bockholdt is right. I test Natty in VM, then maybe I
mistake. I missed commentary six.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
Title:
maverick btrfs slow install
--
ubun
If this is as a result of dpkg calling "fsync" a lot, un-necessarily...
then perhaps we should consider this partly an issue with dpkg as well
as with btrfs?... I might even go so far as to say that it could be
described as a bug in other filesystems which are not honouring the
fsync call?
I welco
Still present in Natty, latest nightly build.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
Title:
maverick btrfs slow install
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https
Any chance of a backport?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
Title:
maverick btrfs slow install
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/
Looks like not problem anymore since Natty.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
Title:
maverick btrfs slow install
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https:/
It won't be fixed earlier than 11.04 is out, as per this info:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/btrfs#Stability
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ub
My confirmation too.Too slow to wait for the installation to complete.
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.u
Just one more confirmation. Unbelievably slow.
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.
I did a related benchmark on a Debian unstable system (with dpkg
1.15.8.5 and linux-image-2.6.35-trunk-amd64) and an ext3/4 file system.
Here were the results:
This affects my ext3/4 filesystem (ext3 mounted with the ext4 driver,
but none of the advanced ext4 features enabled) as well. Iin a
cowbu
Ok, 10.10 is just released and I downloaded it. I tried installing it
with / on btrfs and after 5 hours the install was at 75%. This is on a
AMD Turion II Dual Core M500 with 6 GB. My / was 550 GB.
It's a shame this issue wasn't resolved before releasing Maverick and
this will hurt BTRFS adoption
I don't think it is just btrfs. I am using XFS on top of software raid 1
in Maverick, and if I am doing any disk I/O (e.g. a big copy) dpkg will
take a very long time to unpack. Stopping the disk I/O often won't solve
the problem (maybe patience will).
I installed Brian Roger's dangerous sync free
Constant calls to sync and fsync by dpkg are what slow down btrfs so
much. If you want to try dpkg with syncing removed, I made a PPA for
that: https://launchpad.net/~brian-rogers/+archive/btrfs
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notificati
I'm experiencing this on Maverick Beta. I installed the 64-bit beta of
10.10 last night with btrfs on "/" and "/home" leaving "/boot" on ext4
and now that I've gotten around to running the update manager I'm into
hour 4 of the process. I first noticed the slowness when using Firefox
to search for
Same issue here with the latest 2.6.35.
Any news?
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lis
Any news about other additional patches for slow 2.6.35 btrfs?
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.co
Looks like the patch above may not be the answer, or certainly not the
complete answer... keep an eye on the mailing list for updates!
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscri
@james
that would be rather nice
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mai
** Tags added: patch
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinf
Can we request that Canonical ensure this patch is in the kernel shipped
with Maverick for release as having a serious problem with BTRFS in
10.10 would be a serious setback to the filesystem in Ubuntu.
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug no
The patch posted by Chris Mason on the btrfs mailing list
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs (patch attached)
makes a huge difference on my Maverick VM.
My test case was to turn off the host SATA cache for the VM and then
install a hefty package (netbeans in this case). atop showe
Same problem with my dell xps 1640 : dpkg is very slow, so updates are
abnormally slow... (same problem with 2.6.36 rc1)
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Trying to 'sudo apt-get upgrade' takes upwards of ~2-3 hours on my Acer
Aspire One AOA110 with Ubuntu 10.10 Alpha 3 and btrfs. In particular,
when there is over 100 packages to install, I just let the updates
install overnight, and in some cases it's still not done.
--
maverick btrfs slow install
On a btrfs-related note, the developers have only just realised that it
might be worth advising btrfs users of the following caveat (see the
wiki at https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page):
"Note that Btrfs does not yet have a fsck tool that can fix errors.
While Btrfs is stable on a st
When installing, it took over 12 hours to complete the setup. I have two
ASUS-PHISON SSDs in this netbook. After seeing this:
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Is_Btrfs_optimized_for_SSD.3F
I tried to add 'ssd' to my options in fstab, but this still does not
help.
--
maverick btrfs slow
Added tags from my first previous bug.
** Tags added: filesystem maverick
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lis
hope to see a kernel patch available and applied to maverick soon!
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubunt
James,
In comment #6 you mentioned that you experience no btrfs slowdowns in a
virtualized environment. That's probably because btrfs is running on an
underlying filesystem, with a separate caching mechanism by the physical
hard disk and host OS's handling of your disk. The net effect seems to
mit
This issue seems to have been picked up by Phoronix also...
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODQ4Nw
Lets hope that Canonical will backport whatever fix is forthcoming
before the release of Maverick, otherwise it seems this could set back
the testing and ultimate adoption of BTRF
** Package changed: linux-meta (Ubuntu) => linux (Ubuntu)
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
htt
I've found reference to what I believe is this issue on the BTRFS
mailing list... it seems that there may be a significant performance
regression in certain configurations, but Chris Mason has identified the
cause, and it should be patched... the issue for many of us of course is
that Maverick is f
I can confirm this... on a thinkpad T61p, running Alpha 3 both the
install and subsequent patching is outrageously slow on BTRFS.
What I did notice is that testing in Virtualbox on Lucid on the same
hardware prior to installing for real did not show any slowness what so
ever!
--
maverick btrfs s
I'm marking this bug I opened
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/600846 as a
duplicate.
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bu
The slowness is not just with installation of the OS, sudo aptitude
safe-upgrade takes a very long time if there are a decent number of pkgs
to upgrade. Seems to be an issue with dpkg. Unpacking and setting up are
where the slowness is most noticeable.
BTW, the problem the fedora user had with yum
"Setting up" is very slow, too. But tar -jxvf has same speed as of ext4.
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists
the btrfs (filesystem) is in the linux kernel, btrfs-tools provides
userland tools for working with the filesystem (like taking snapshots,
defragmenting, etc.)
** Package changed: btrfs-tools (Ubuntu) => linux-meta (Ubuntu)
** Changed in: linux-meta (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
m
I can confirm the same issue; installation via the alpha 2 32bit
alternate media takes ~2 hours when installing to a btrfs partition,
compared to ~15 minutes to ext4. I'm not sure that system specs are
necessary, because I don't think this is a bug (or if it is, it should
be addressed upstream).
T
** Package changed: ubuntu => btrfs-tools (Ubuntu)
--
maverick btrfs slow install
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/601299
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://li
39 matches
Mail list logo
