Holger Hoffstätte posted on Thu, 03 Mar 2016 20:53:57 +0100 as excerpted:
> It changes things because you likely have a higher value set for
> vm/dirty_expire_centisecs or dirty_bytes explicitly configured; I have
> it set to 1000 (10s) to prevent large writebacks from choking
> everything.
> The
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 02:13:09PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 10:50:58PM +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> > On 03/03/16 21:47, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > >> $mount | grep sdf
> > >> /dev/sdf1 on /mnt/usb type btrfs
> > >> (rw,relatime,space_cache=v2,subvolid=5,subvol=/)
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 10:50:58PM +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> On 03/03/16 21:47, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> >> $mount | grep sdf
> >> /dev/sdf1 on /mnt/usb type btrfs
> >> (rw,relatime,space_cache=v2,subvolid=5,subvol=/)
> > Do you still see the same behavior with the old space_cache
On 03/03/16 21:47, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
>> $mount | grep sdf
>> /dev/sdf1 on /mnt/usb type btrfs
>> (rw,relatime,space_cache=v2,subvolid=5,subvol=/)
> Do you still see the same behavior with the old space_cache format?
> This appears to be an issue of space management and allocation, so
>
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 01:28:29PM +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
>
> Here's an observation that is not a bug (as in data corruption), just
> somewhat odd and unnecessary behaviour. It could be considered a
> performance or scalability bug.
>
> I've noticed that slow slow buffered writes
On 2016-03-03 14:53, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
On 03/03/16 19:33, Liu Bo wrote:
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 01:28:29PM +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
(..)
I've noticed that slow slow buffered writes create a huge number of
unnecessary 4k sized extents. At first I wrote it off as odd buffering
On 03/03/16 19:33, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 01:28:29PM +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
(..)
>> I've noticed that slow slow buffered writes create a huge number of
>> unnecessary 4k sized extents. At first I wrote it off as odd buffering
>> behaviour of the application (a download
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 01:28:29PM +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
>
> Here's an observation that is not a bug (as in data corruption), just
> somewhat odd and unnecessary behaviour. It could be considered a
> performance or scalability bug.
>
> I've noticed that slow slow buffered writes
