Summary: Two CentOS 5.4 servers, one deployed Dec 2009, the other April 2010. mkfs.ext3 performance differs wildly. e2fsprogs package version is identical but the mkfs.ext3 binaries are different (but identical in size).
I've already posted to the CentOS users mailing list... Any suggestions how else I could track this down? Thanks, Aleksey Situation: two similar servers, both with CentOS 5.4 64-bit. Making an ext3 filesystem on one takes seconds, on the other minutes. Partition Size Server 1 Server 2 1 GB 0.7 sec 0.3 sec 4 GB 2.5 sec 1.2 sec 40 GB 15 sec 13 min WTF I took "mkfs" and "mkfs.ext3" from server 1, put them on server 2, and got an improvement: 40 GB 15 sec 3 min Version numbers are identical but binaries different: e2fsprogs RPM is e2fsprogs-1.39-23.el5 on both systems mkfs --version reports "util-linux 2.13-pre7" on both systems mkfs -V reports the same on both systems (mke2fs 1.3 (29-May-2006) Using EXT2FS Library version 1.39) file size on mkfs and mkfs.ext3 binaries is identical However, checksum on these binaries differs across servers, and "cmp" reports files are different Just out of curiousity, I ran "rpm -V e2fsprogs" to see if rpm would pick up the difference and sure enough, it complained mkfs.ext3 changed. Both of these servers have CentOS 5.4; Server 1 was installed in Dec 2009, Server 2 in April 2010. I'd like to: (a) account for the difference in the binaries, and (b) see if something else is different that I can make the same to get the mkfs.ext3 time down to 15 sec on both systems. Solving (a) should shed light on (b). Any ideas? Best, Aleksey _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
