Re: xfs: very slow after mount, very slow at umount

From: Mark Lord
Date: Thu Jan 27 2011 - 11:03:58 EST

On 11-01-27 10:40 AM, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011, Mark Lord wrote:
>> Can you recommend a good set of mkfs.xfs parameters to suit the characteristics
>> of this system? Eg. Only a few thousand active inodes, and nearly all files are
>> in the 600MB -> 20GB size range. The usage pattern it must handle is up to
>> six concurrent streaming writes at the same time as up to three streaming reads,
>> with no significant delays permitted on the reads.
>> That's the kind of workload that I find XFS handles nicely,
>> and EXT4 has given me trouble with in the past.
> I did a load of benchmarks a long time ago testing every mkfs.xfs option there
> was, and I found that most of the time (if not all), the defaults were the best.

I am concerned with fragmentation on the very special workload in this case.
I'd really like the 20GB files, written over a 1-2 hour period, to consist
of a very few very large extents, as much as possible.

Rather than hundreds or thousands of "tiny" MB sized extents.
I wonder what the best mkfs.xfs parameters might be to encourage that?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at