On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 00:22 +0400, Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote: > > This seems strange, because to me this type of workload would lend > > itself to being less fragmented then most workloads. All the box > does is > > records TV programs, so over the course of 30-60min periods I would > > guess 95+% of the writes are sequential. > > > > do you ever remove files?
Yes, files are deleted when the drive starts to fill up, which is how I discovered this issue in the first place. I always kept a minimum of 10gb free, and when I got close to that limit is when the load would spike. I have since set to the limit to 40gb and I haven't seen the problem since, but I can't use that 40gb of space either though. > > > Why would the fragmentation be so bad? Is there a way to tell what > the > > fragmentation rate is? > > > > can you please run debugreiserfs -m /dev/hda1 > bitmap and send me > that > file? > bitmap should contain dump of free and used blocks. If most of bitmap > blocks contain a lot of interleaving free/used sections - free space > is > highly fragmented and allocating new free blocks can be CPU > expensive. I do record two programs at once from time to time, so I can understand how that would cause fragmentation. However after each program I also transcode them to a different format one at a time. So I would think that would reduce fragmentation that may have occurred from recording two programs at once? Although I suppose if I was transcoding and recording at the same time, it would just make things worse. I will send Vladimir the debugreiserfs output privately. -- Mike Benoit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
