osdir.com
mailing list archive

Subject: Re: Results of "bk clone" tests with 2.6.2, reiser4, reiserfs, ext3, xfs and jfs - msg#00084

List: file-systems.reiserfs.general

Date: Prev Next Index Thread: Prev Next Index
On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 02:32, Steven Cole wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 February 2004 09:12 am, Hans Reiser wrote:
> > Steven Cole wrote:
> > >I used the "-o key=key_short" option when creating the
> > >reiser4 file system due to getting this message:
> > >"kernel: WARNING: Key format mismatch. Only small keys are supported."
> >
> > This might have hurt our performance substantially. Did you
> > intentionally choose small keys? If not, Nikita, why did this happen?
>
> Well, intentionally _only_ because it seemed the reasonable thing to do
> in the face of the above warning message. Tomorrow, I can recompile
> the reiser4-enabled kernel with the large keys option and mkfs.reiser4
> again without that key_short option. I'll let you know if there are any
> interesting
> results.
>
> Steven

OK, tomorrow came a day early this week.

I recompiled the 2.6.2 reiser4 kernel with CONFIG_REISER4_LARGE_KEY=y,
rebooted, and created a reiser4 fs without the key_small option as before.

I repeated the tests using the same bk tree and got very similar results
to using short keys.

After that, I umounted and did a fsck.reiser4 and got many errors,
"12463 fixable corrections". I repeated fsck.reiser4 with --fix, and
the errors were fixed. (No corruption found)

I then mounted the fs again, created another clone, ran "bk -r check -acv"
on the new clone, and that test passed with no errors. I then ran fsck again,
and
it reported 2080 fixable corrections, which were fixed with a following
fsck.reiser4 --fix /dev/sda9.

[root@spc2 steven]# mount -t reiser4 /dev/sda9 /r4_testing
[root@spc2 steven]# df -T
Filesystem Type 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda1 ext3 798476 155108 602808 21% /
/dev/sda8 ext3 7147260 3548360 3235836 53% /home
none tmpfs 257332 0 257332 0% /dev/shm
/dev/sda6 ext3 4024188 1871100 1948664 49% /usr
/dev/sda7 ext3 806368 61504 703900 9% /var
/dev/sda9 reiser4 3930680 288 3930392 1% /r4_testing


[steven@spc2 r4_testing]$ /usr/bin/time bk clone -q testing-2.6 clone_1-2.6
58.97user 37.55system 2:05.34elapsed 77%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (1major+176404minor)pagefaults 0swaps
[steven@spc2 r4_testing]$ /usr/bin/time bk clone -q testing-2.6 clone_2-2.6
59.29user 38.55system 2:15.31elapsed 72%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (1major+176404minor)pagefaults 0swaps
[steven@spc2 r4_testing]$ /usr/bin/time bk clone -q testing-2.6 clone_3-2.6
59.27user 38.29system 2:13.40elapsed 73%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (1major+176404minor)pagefaults 0swaps
[steven@spc2 r4_testing]$ /usr/bin/time bk clone -q testing-2.6 clone_4-2.6
59.22user 38.08system 2:14.81elapsed 72%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (2major+176403minor)pagefaults 0swaps
[steven@spc2 r4_testing]$ /usr/bin/time bk clone -q testing-2.6 clone_5-2.6
59.15user 38.42system 2:14.20elapsed 72%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (3major+176402minor)pagefaults 0swaps
[steven@spc2 r4_testing]$ df -T
Filesystem Type 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda1 ext3 798476 155104 602812 21% /
/dev/sda8 ext3 7147260 3548360 3235836 53% /home
none tmpfs 257332 0 257332 0% /dev/shm
/dev/sda6 ext3 4024188 1871100 1948664 49% /usr
/dev/sda7 ext3 806368 61504 703900 9% /var
/dev/sda9 reiser4 3930680 1208876 2721804 31% /r4_testing

I then umounted the reiser4 partition and ran fsck.reiser4 on it,
and got lots of the following:

Error: Node (50123), item (11): StatData of the file
[14d9e:732e7573627175:14da6] has the wrong bytes (35872),
Should be (36864). Plugin (stat40).
Time interval: Wed Feb 11 11:08:35 2004 - Wed Feb 11 11:10:43 2004
***** fsck.reiser4 finished at Wed Feb 11 11:10:43 2004
Closing fs...done

12463 fixable corruptions were detected in the FileSystem. Run with --fix
option to fix them.

[root@spc2 /]# /usr/local/sbin/fsck.reiser4 --fix /dev/sda9
*******************************************************************
This is an EXPERIMENTAL version of fsck.reiser4. Read REAMDE first.
*******************************************************************

Fscking the /dev/sda9 block device.
Will fix minor corruptions of the Reiser4 SuperBblock.
Will fix minor corruptions of the Reiser4 FileSystem.
Continue?
(Yes/No): yes
***** Openning the fs.
Reiser4 fs was detected on the /dev/sda9.
Master super block (16):
magic: ReIsEr4
blksize: 4096
format: 0x0 (format40)
label: <none>

Format super block (17):
plugin: format40
description: Disk-format for reiser4, ver. 0.5.0
magic: ReIsEr40FoRmAt
flushes: 0
mkfs id: 0x4b822079
blocks: 1034176
free blocks: 731967
root block: 293783
tail policy: 0x4 (smart)
next oid: 0x2d287
file count: 119341
tree height: 4
key policy: LARGE

***** Tree Traverse Pass: scanning the reiser4 internal tree.

After many messages, fsck reported "No corruption found".

Steven




Was this page helpful?
Yes No
Thread at a glance:

Previous Message by Date: click to view message preview

Re: Results of "bk clone" tests with 2.6.2, reiser4, reiserfs, ext3, xfs and jfs

On Wednesday 11 February 2004 09:12 am, Hans Reiser wrote: > Steven Cole wrote: > >I used the "-o key=key_short" option when creating the > >reiser4 file system due to getting this message: > >"kernel: WARNING: Key format mismatch. Only small keys are supported." > > This might have hurt our performance substantially. Did you > intentionally choose small keys? If not, Nikita, why did this happen? Well, intentionally _only_ because it seemed the reasonable thing to do in the face of the above warning message. Tomorrow, I can recompile the reiser4-enabled kernel with the large keys option and mkfs.reiser4 again without that key_short option. I'll let you know if there are any interesting results. Steven

Next Message by Date: click to view message preview

Re: reiserfsprogs-3.6.12 release

On Wednesday 11 February 2004 20:02, Brandon Low wrote: > This release gives me: > > Partition /dev/hda3 is mounted with write permissions, cannot check it > > When I try to run fsck.reiserfs /dev/hda3 during bootup when the fs is > mounted readonly. I have used init=/bin/bash and confirmed this result > interactively... this is strange, would you also try to confirm the result by running this test program on bootup with init=/bin/bash and tell me what it says? - Thanks, Vitaly Fertman updatetime.c Description: Text Data

Previous Message by Thread: click to view message preview

Re: Results of "bk clone" tests with 2.6.2, reiser4, reiserfs, ext3, xfs and jfs

On Wednesday 11 February 2004 09:12 am, Hans Reiser wrote: > Steven Cole wrote: > >I used the "-o key=key_short" option when creating the > >reiser4 file system due to getting this message: > >"kernel: WARNING: Key format mismatch. Only small keys are supported." > > This might have hurt our performance substantially. Did you > intentionally choose small keys? If not, Nikita, why did this happen? Well, intentionally _only_ because it seemed the reasonable thing to do in the face of the above warning message. Tomorrow, I can recompile the reiser4-enabled kernel with the large keys option and mkfs.reiser4 again without that key_short option. I'll let you know if there are any interesting results. Steven

Next Message by Thread: click to view message preview

Re: Results of "bk clone" tests with 2.6.2, reiser4, reiserfs, ext3, xfs and jfs

Steven Cole wrote: On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 02:32, Steven Cole wrote: On Wednesday 11 February 2004 09:12 am, Hans Reiser wrote: Steven Cole wrote: I used the "-o key=key_short" option when creating the reiser4 file system due to getting this message: "kernel: WARNING: Key format mismatch. Only small keys are supported." This might have hurt our performance substantially. Did you intentionally choose small keys? If not, Nikita, why did this happen? Well, intentionally _only_ because it seemed the reasonable thing to do in the face of the above warning message. Tomorrow, I can recompile the reiser4-enabled kernel with the large keys option and mkfs.reiser4 again without that key_short option. I'll let you know if there are any interesting results. Steven OK, tomorrow came a day early this week. I recompiled the 2.6.2 reiser4 kernel with CONFIG_REISER4_LARGE_KEY=y, rebooted, and created a reiser4 fs without the key_small option as before. I repeated the tests using the same bk tree and got very similar results to using short keys. Hmmm, we need to look into that. Thanks Steven. Zam, please analyze just what fs operations this benchmark performs, report it, and then analyze why we are slow. After that, I umounted and did a fsck.reiser4 and got many errors, "12463 fixable corrections". Well it seems you found a reason for us to delay our release. Nikita will go fix it and then get back to you.
Sign up for updates to this mailing list. email:
Loading Comments...
Home | News | Patents | Sitemap | FAQ | advertise

Advertising by