Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (1470 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] Why Is Leap 42.1 Benchmarking Poorly?
On 02/25/2016 07:40 AM, Roger Oberholtzer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Vojtěch Zeisek
<vojtech.zeisek@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

OK, again. If some feature of Btrfs is making performance problems for DBs
(do
we agree it does?), then it does not make sense to use it for DB, doesn't it?
Of course, there are dozens of user cases. Some are are suitable, some not.

Our primary use for openSUSE is as a data collection system that
collects large amounts of data (megabytes a minute to various data
files, often sustained for a couple of hours at a time) that is
routinely copied off-system, and then the collected data files
deleted. I have been wondering how btrfs use may impact this. I guess
we will just have to set up a system and see what happens. Any
predictions?

You might want to look at using XFS in 'realtime' mode.

From the man page

An XFS filesystem has up to three parts: a data section, a log
section, and a realtime section. Using the default mkfs.xfs(8)
options, the realtime section is absent, and the log area is
contained within the data section.

and

The realtime section is used to store the data of realtime
files. These files had an attribute bit set through xfsctl(3)
after file creation, before any data was written to the file.
The realtime section is divided into a number of extents of
fixed size (specified at mkfs.xfs(8) time). Each file in the
realtime section has an extent size that is a multiple of the
realtime section extent size.


It may take a bit of experimentation. There's a lot out there on using
XFS/realtime for database performance with oracle and postgress. You
might use that as a bass.




--
A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups