mirror of
https://git.FreeBSD.org/src.git
synced 2024-12-29 12:03:03 +00:00
a61ab64ac4
His description of the problem and solution follow. My own tests show speedups on typical filesystem intensive workloads of 5% to 12% which is very impressive considering the small amount of code change involved. ------ One day I noticed that some file operations run much faster on small file systems then on big ones. I've looked at the ffs algorithms, thought about them, and redesigned the dirpref algorithm. First I want to describe the results of my tests. These results are old and I have improved the algorithm after these tests were done. Nevertheless they show how big the perfomance speedup may be. I have done two file/directory intensive tests on a two OpenBSD systems with old and new dirpref algorithm. The first test is "tar -xzf ports.tar.gz", the second is "rm -rf ports". The ports.tar.gz file is the ports collection from the OpenBSD 2.8 release. It contains 6596 directories and 13868 files. The test systems are: 1. Celeron-450, 128Mb, two IDE drives, the system at wd0, file system for test is at wd1. Size of test file system is 8 Gb, number of cg=991, size of cg is 8m, block size = 8k, fragment size = 1k OpenBSD-current from Dec 2000 with BUFCACHEPERCENT=35 2. PIII-600, 128Mb, two IBM DTLA-307045 IDE drives at i815e, the system at wd0, file system for test is at wd1. Size of test file system is 40 Gb, number of cg=5324, size of cg is 8m, block size = 8k, fragment size = 1k OpenBSD-current from Dec 2000 with BUFCACHEPERCENT=50 You can get more info about the test systems and methods at: http://www.ptci.ru/gluk/dirpref/old/dirpref.html Test Results tar -xzf ports.tar.gz rm -rf ports mode old dirpref new dirpref speedup old dirprefnew dirpref speedup First system normal 667 472 1.41 477 331 1.44 async 285 144 1.98 130 14 9.29 sync 768 616 1.25 477 334 1.43 softdep 413 252 1.64 241 38 6.34 Second system normal 329 81 4.06 263.5 93.5 2.81 async 302 25.7 11.75 112 2.26 49.56 sync 281 57.0 4.93 263 90.5 2.9 softdep 341 40.6 8.4 284 4.76 59.66 "old dirpref" and "new dirpref" columns give a test time in seconds. speedup - speed increasement in times, ie. old dirpref / new dirpref. ------ Algorithm description The old dirpref algorithm is described in comments: /* * Find a cylinder to place a directory. * * The policy implemented by this algorithm is to select from * among those cylinder groups with above the average number of * free inodes, the one with the smallest number of directories. */ A new directory is allocated in a different cylinder groups than its parent directory resulting in a directory tree that is spreaded across all the cylinder groups. This spreading out results in a non-optimal access to the directories and files. When we have a small filesystem it is not a problem but when the filesystem is big then perfomance degradation becomes very apparent. What I mean by a big file system ? 1. A big filesystem is a filesystem which occupy 20-30 or more percent of total drive space, i.e. first and last cylinder are physically located relatively far from each other. 2. It has a relatively large number of cylinder groups, for example more cylinder groups than 50% of the buffers in the buffer cache. The first results in long access times, while the second results in many buffers being used by metadata operations. Such operations use cylinder group blocks and on-disk inode blocks. The cylinder group block (fs->fs_cblkno) contains struct cg, inode and block bit maps. It is 2k in size for the default filesystem parameters. If new and parent directories are located in different cylinder groups then the system performs more input/output operations and uses more buffers. On filesystems with many cylinder groups, lots of cache buffers are used for metadata operations. My solution for this problem is very simple. I allocate many directories in one cylinder group. I also do some things, so that the new allocation method does not cause excessive fragmentation and all directory inodes will not be located at a location far from its file's inodes and data. The algorithm is: /* * Find a cylinder group to place a directory. * * The policy implemented by this algorithm is to allocate a * directory inode in the same cylinder group as its parent * directory, but also to reserve space for its files inodes * and data. Restrict the number of directories which may be * allocated one after another in the same cylinder group * without intervening allocation of files. * * If we allocate a first level directory then force allocation * in another cylinder group. */ My early versions of dirpref give me a good results for a wide range of file operations and different filesystem capacities except one case: those applications that create their entire directory structure first and only later fill this structure with files. My solution for such and similar cases is to limit a number of directories which may be created one after another in the same cylinder group without intervening file creations. For this purpose, I allocate an array of counters at mount time. This array is linked to the superblock fs->fs_contigdirs[cg]. Each time a directory is created the counter increases and each time a file is created the counter decreases. A 60Gb filesystem with 8mb/cg requires 10kb of memory for the counters array. The maxcontigdirs is a maximum number of directories which may be created without an intervening file creation. I found in my tests that the best performance occurs when I restrict the number of directories in one cylinder group such that all its files may be located in the same cylinder group. There may be some deterioration in performance if all the file inodes are in the same cylinder group as its containing directory, but their data partially resides in a different cylinder group. The maxcontigdirs value is calculated to try to prevent this condition. Since there is no way to know how many files and directories will be allocated later I added two optimization parameters in superblock/tunefs. They are: int32_t fs_avgfilesize; /* expected average file size */ int32_t fs_avgfpdir; /* expected # of files per directory */ These parameters have reasonable defaults but may be tweeked for special uses of a filesystem. They are only necessary in rare cases like better tuning a filesystem being used to store a squid cache. I have been using this algorithm for about 3 months. I have done a lot of testing on filesystems with different capacities, average filesize, average number of files per directory, and so on. I think this algorithm has no negative impact on filesystem perfomance. It works better than the default one in all cases. The new dirpref will greatly improve untarring/removing/coping of big directories, decrease load on cvs servers and much more. The new dirpref doesn't speedup a compilation process, but also doesn't slow it down. Obtained from: Grigoriy Orlov <gluk@ptci.ru> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| ffs_alloc.c | ||
| ffs_balloc.c | ||
| ffs_extern.h | ||
| ffs_inode.c | ||
| ffs_snapshot.c | ||
| ffs_softdep_stub.c | ||
| ffs_softdep.c | ||
| ffs_subr.c | ||
| ffs_tables.c | ||
| ffs_vfsops.c | ||
| ffs_vnops.c | ||
| fs.h | ||
| README.snapshot | ||
| README.softupdates | ||
| softdep.h | ||
$FreeBSD$ Using Soft Updates To enable the soft updates feature in your kernel, add option SOFTUPDATES to your kernel configuration. Once you are running a kernel with soft update support, you need to enable it for whichever filesystems you wish to run with the soft update policy. This is done with the -n option to tunefs(8) on the UNMOUNTED filesystems, e.g. from single-user mode you'd do something like: tunefs -n enable /usr To permanently enable soft updates on the /usr filesystem (or at least until a corresponding ``tunefs -n disable'' is done). Soft Updates Copyright Restrictions As of June 2000 the restrictive copyright has been removed and replaced with a `Berkeley-style' copyright. The files implementing soft updates now reside in the sys/ufs/ffs directory and are compiled into the generic kernel by default. Soft Updates Status The soft updates code has been running in production on many systems for the past two years generally quite successfully. The two current sets of shortcomings are: 1) On filesystems that are chronically full, the two minute lag from the time a file is deleted until its free space shows up will result in premature filesystem full failures. This failure mode is most evident in small filesystems such as the root. For this reason, use of soft updates is not recommended on the root filesystem. 2) If your system routines runs parallel processes each of which remove many files, the kernel memory rate limiting code may not be able to slow removal operations to a level sustainable by the disk subsystem. The result is that the kernel runs out of memory and hangs. Both of these problems are being addressed, but have not yet been resolved. There are no other known problems at this time. How Soft Updates Work For more general information on soft updates, please see: http://www.mckusick.com/softdep/ http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/papers/CSE-TR-254-95/ -- Marshall Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com> July 2000