If its related to the FS driver ( inode table or algorithms ) the
program "slabtop" might give an indication of the kernel processes
eating system performance.
Slabtop is in the ps-tools suite, should be on any major linux distribution.
2009/1/1 Greg Swift <gregswift(a)gmail.com>:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 17:35, Mike McGrath
<mmcgrath(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008, Corey Chandler wrote:
>
> > Mike McGrath wrote:
> > > Lets pool some knowledge together because at this point, I'm missing
> > > something.
> > >
> > > I've been doing all measurements with sar as bonnie, etc, causes
> > > builds to
> > > timeout.
> > >
> > > Problem: We're seeing slower then normal disk IO. At least I think we
> > > are. This is a PERC5/E and MD1000 array.
> > >
> >
> > 1. Are we sure the array hasn't lost a drive?
>
> I can't physically look at the drive (they're a couple hundred miles away)
> but we've seen no reports of it (via the drac anyway). I'll have to get
> the raid software on there to be for sure. I'd think a degraded raid
> array would affect both direct block access and file level access.
>
> > 2. What's your scheduler set to? CFQ tends to not work in many
> > applications
> > where the deadline scheduler works better...
> >
>
> I'd tried other schedulers earlier but they didn't seem to make much of a
> difference. Even still, I'll get dealine setup and take a look.
>
> At least we've got the dd and cat problem figured out. Now to figure out
> why there's such a discrepancy between file level reads and block level
> reads. Anyone else have an array of this type and size to run those tests
> on? I'd be curious to see what others are getting.
we are working on a rhel3 to 5 migration at my job. We have 2 primary
filesystems. one is large database files and the other is lots of small
documents. As we were testing backup software for rhel5 we noticed a 60%
decrease in speed moving from rhel3 to rhel5 with the same file system, but
only on the document filesystem, the db file system was perfectly snappy.
After a lot of troubleshooting it was deemed to be related to the dir_index
btree hash. The path was to long before there was a difference in the names
of the files, making the index incredibly slow. Removing dir_index
recovered a bit of the difference, but didn't resolve the issue. A quick
rename of one of the base directories recovered almost the entire 60%.
Thought I'd at least throw it out there, although I'm not sure that it is
the exact issue, it doesn't hurt to have it floating in the background.
-greg/xaeth
_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen, / with kind regards,
Sascha Thomas Spreitzer
http://spreitzer.name/