Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Fedora Logical Volume Manager Benchmarks

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    821

    Default

    I wonder why the article then claims that
    Fedora doesn't use write barriers with LVM
    A check of dmesg should decide the matter.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    130

    Default

    What a typical phoronix thread. An unsubstaniated comment about a distribution accepted as fact to fuel nerdrage

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chithanh View Post
    I wonder why the article then claims thatA check of dmesg should decide the matter.
    I don't care what the article said, I'm telling you what the fedora site said. I trust the guys who wrote this stuff more than Michael, in this case, especially since I haven't been able to find any evidence that fedora disables barriers at any level.
    For the record, this F15 laptop says
    Code:
    EXT4-fs (dm-1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    580

    Default

    Does anyone has any type of official link stating that Fedora 15 indeed doesn't support write barriers on ext4 over LVM?
    (I have no problems remounting ext4 with mount / -o remount,barrier; by default ext4 is mounted in ordered mode)

    - Gilboa
    Last edited by gilboa; 07-04-2011 at 03:19 AM.
    DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB, GTX780, F20/x86_64, Dell U2711.
    SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F20/x86_64, Dell U2412..
    BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F20/x86-64.
    LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F20/x86_64.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    I don't care what the article said, I'm telling you what the fedora site said. I trust the guys who wrote this stuff more than Michael, in this case, especially since I haven't been able to find any evidence that fedora disables barriers at any level.
    For the record, this F15 laptop says
    Code:
    EXT4-fs (dm-1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode
    you are looking at the wrong stuff. Even if ext4 tries to use barriers if lvm does not support them you are SOL.

    Quote Originally Posted by gilboa View Post
    Does anyone has any type of official link stating that Fedora 15 indeed doesn't support write barriers on ext4 over LVM?
    (I have no problems remounting ext4 with mount / -o remount,barrier; by default ext4 is mounted in ordered mode)

    - Gilboa
    which will do nothing, if lvm does not support barriers.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    you are looking at the wrong stuff. Even if ext4 tries to use barriers if lvm does not support them you are SOL.



    which will do nothing, if lvm does not support barriers.
    Unless I'm mistaken that WAS the lvm message (EXT4-fs) since lvm is the one who would be responsible for the device management (hence dm).
    If you can find some documentation that shows otherwise and where I should look I would appreciate it.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,725

    Default

    >EXT4-fs (dm-1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode

    is the mount message from ext4. Filesystem, underlying device, mount options.

    Nothing from lvm.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    >EXT4-fs (dm-1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode

    is the mount message from ext4. Filesystem, underlying device, mount options.

    Nothing from lvm.
    That's my point: the message should be from LVM since it is doing the management of said device.
    Per this message, https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9554#c0, syslog should report if barrier's are enabled but not supported by lvm.
    I don't see the message, q.e.d., error not ocuring.
    Do you have any link to documentation, or command I can run, that would say otherwise?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Albuquerque NM USA
    Posts
    42

    Default Another weird LVM speedup

    I stumbled upon another weird case where someone saw LVM be faster than directly using partitions. Turned out the LVM overhead (or maybe just the tester's whims) made a 1TB disk become slightly less than 1TB and apparently that allowed XFS (without inode64 mount option) keep inodes closer to their data. Life can be full of surprises.

    Michael's tests were with ext4, though. And it's more of a size thing than an LVM thing, but if using LVM changes your sizing habits, then some performance differences could seem LVM-related...

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kari18 View Post
    not using barriers = I don't care about data = fedora is unfit for every even slightly serious setup.
    I don't think fedora has ever meant to have been for serious setups. It's more a distribution to try things out, before putting into RHEL.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •