Re: Extremely annoying ext3
On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 12:49, Aaron wrote:
> Fellow Debs,
>
> I'm sorry this is so long. Specificity before brevity when asking for
> help, that's what I always say... Okay, I don't say that a lot.
>
> I have two things to bring to you today (as if I don't post enough of
> my silly problems already). The first is why my ext3 drive is so slow,
> and the second is what other alternatives I have, if any.
>
> I built a file server machine with the intention of storing all of my
> major media and static files in one location for my other machines to
> have access to. What better solution than Samba? I installed RedHat
> 7.3 at first, the distro I was most comfortable with. It worked out
> quite well until I wanted to upgrade the kernel or add X11 and the RPM
> situation was unacceptable. I decided to switch to Debian.
>
> I mention RedHat because my experience with ext3 in RedHat was much
> different than my (as yet small) experience with ext3 in Debian, so
> I'm hoping some other folks out there can shed light on this as you
> all must have hard drives so someone's gotta know something about it.
>
> I have a couple of old NTFS drives that have data on them that I want
> to get onto my brand new 200 gig drive on the file server, so I have a
> Windows XP box with the old NTFS drives in it and I'm transferring the
> files over the network onto the new ext3 drive in my Debian woody
> file server. I know you're all going to tell me that there is fairly
> proven NTFS read support in kernel module form, but frankly, I don't
> trust it.
>
> So I drag the files on the Windows XP box into a Samba share that sits
> on my 200 gig formatted ext3 (formatted ext2, journal written with
> tune2fs, and mounted as 'ext3'). I run DU Meter in Windows (nice
> little program if you ever have to monitor net traffic in Windows),
> and the files copy at 7 or so megs per second for about TWO seconds
> before stopping. At this point the file server locks up (no terminal
> response, 'top' running inside my SSH session hangs) and the hard
> drive light comes on solid for about TEN seconds.
>
> Lather, rinse, repeat.
>
> I read a few articles and posts online about ext3 performance tuning
> and I did change some parameters in my /proc/sys/vm/bdflush as
> recommended by an article on IBM's website:
>
> http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-fs8
>
> When I tried it again, the bandwidth would top at maybe 4 or 5 megs
> per second and only transfer for a moment, break for a moment or two,
> and transfer for a moment. Essentially the same level of performance
> but now the bursts are much closer together and much less intense. I
> never had this problem with RedHat in my recollection, so I wonder
> what about the Debian ext3 implementation may be making this happen?
>
> I watched top with a delay of 0.1 seconds and caught kjournald and
> keventd at the top of the list MANY of the moments just before the
> system hung. I thought JBD might be responsible so I recompiled the
> kernel without the debugging support, but that made no difference
> whatsoever.
>
> What is this all about?! Is there any way I can fix it? Is it not an
> ext3 problem?
>
> And taking a different approach, is ext3 my best bet for simply trying
> to maintain data integrity on the drive? I could run ext2 and just
> hope the system never goes down, or I could fsck it regularly, but I'm
> really looking for something a bit more reliable. I also realize that
> ext3 support is, itself, experimental. What else is there that I could
> try? I'm not against reformatting the drive, especially since a recent
> power failure caused almost half of the thing to be beyond recovery
> (fsck ran with -y for about ... Five hours? 100 gig partition.)
I'd give reiserfs a go. It's journalled and has a good set of tools.
I've been using it for a while and have no problems with it (apart from
my own stupidity :). http://www.namesys.com/. I'm pretty sure the
standard debian kernel supports it so you don't even have to recompile
the kernel though you might need to get reiserfsprogs.
I've been using XFS (not to be confused with X's font server) as well
for a year or so, but there is a problem in that if a file is open and
the machine dies the file is corrupted. I don't know if this has been
fixed though. XFS has some nice features that the other filesystems
don't have, such as realtime support. XFS is not supported in 2.4 but it
is in 2.5, though you can get patches for 2.4 from the sgi web site.
http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/
rgh
>
> I hope someone out there can lend me a hand... You guys/girls have
> been fantastic, I'm eager to hear what you have to say.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Aaron Bieber
> -
> Graphic Design // Web Design
> http://www.core-dev.com/
aaron@core-dev.com
--
"It is possible to make things of great complexity out of things
that are very simple. There is no conservation of simplicity"
-- Stephen Wolfram
Richard Heycock <rgh@roughage.com.au>
tel : 0410 646 369
key fingerprint : 909D CBFA C669 AC2F A937 AFA4 661B 9D21 EAAB 4291
Reply to: