Re: ext3 throughput woes on certain (possibly heavily fragmented) files

[Nikita Danilov <Nikita@Namesys.COM>]

Stephen C. Tweedie writes:
 > Hi,
 > 
 > On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 02:24:19AM -0700, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
 > 
 > > [aaronl@vitelus:~]$ time cat mail/debian-legal > /dev/null
 > > cat mail/debian-legal > /dev/null  0.00s user 0.02s system 0% cpu 5.565 total
 > > [aaronl@vitelus:~]$ ls -l mail/debian-legal
 > > -rw-------    1 aaronl   mail      7893525 Sep  3 00:42 mail/debian-legal
 > > [aaronl@vitelus:~]$ time cat /usr/src/linux-2.4.18.tar.bz2 > /dev/null
 > > cat /usr/src/linux-2.4.18.tar.bz2 > /dev/null  0.00s user 0.10s system 16% cpu 0.616 total
 > > [aaronl@vitelus:~]$ ls -l /usr/src/linux-2.4.18.tar.bz2 
 > > -rw-r--r--    1 aaronl   aaronl   24161675 Apr 14 11:53
 > > 
 > > Both files were AFAIK not in any cache, and they are on the same
 > > partition.
 > > 
 > > My current uninformed theory is that this is caused by fragmentation,
 > > since the linux tarball was downloaded all at once but the mailbox I'm
 > > comparing it to has 1695 messages, each of which having been appended
 > > seperately to the file. All of my mailboxes exhibit similarly awful
 > > performance.
 > 
 > Yep, both ext2 and ext3 can get badly fragmented by files which are
 > closed, reopened and appended to frequently like that.
 > 
 > > Do any other filesystems handle this type of thing more gracefully?
 > 
 > There are some ideas from recent FFS changes.  One thing they now do
 > is to defragment things automatically as a file grows by effectively
 > deleting and then reallocating the last 16 blocks of the file.
 > Fragmentation will still occur, but less so, if we do that.
 > 

Another possible solution is to try to "defer" allocation. For example,
in reiser4 (and XFS, I believe) extents are allocated on the transaction
commit and as a result, if file was created by several writes, it will
still be allocated as one extent.

 > 
 > Cheers,
 >  Stephen

Nikita.