From: Russell Leighton [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 5:36 AM
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: email@example.com; Linux Kernel Mailing List; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Subject: [Lse-tech] Re: ext3 performance bottleneck as the number of spindles gets large
Is this a property of ext3 only or the vfs? ... the real question being: will ext2 or some of the other
"major" filesystems like reiser perform better?
Andrew Morton wrote:
Has anyone done any work looking into the I/O scaling of Linux / ext3 per
spindle or per adapter? We would like to compare notes.
No. ext3 scalability is very poor, I'm afraid. The fs really wasn't
up and running until kernel 2.4.5 and we just didn't have time to
address that issue.
I've only just started to look at the ext3 code but it seems to me that replacing the
BKL with a per - ext3 file system lock could remove some of the contention thats
getting measured. What data are the BKL protecting in these ext3 functions? Could a
lock per FS approach work?
The vague plan there is to replace lock_kernel with lock_journal
where appropriate. But ext3 scalability work of this nature
will be targetted at the 2.5 kernel, most probably.
I'll take a look, see if there's any low-hanging fruit in there,
but I doubt that the results will be fantastic.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/