FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 09-06-2011, 05:52 PM
Pandu Poluan
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

Sorry, forgot one thing: For the time being, I'm sticking with
2.6.39-hardened. Saw too many incompatibility bug with 3.0 (due to
packages hard-wired to expect the kernel version to begin with "2.6").

Rgds,


On 2011-09-07, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
> So, can anyone recommend me a filesystem that fulfills my following needs:
>
> Scenario: vFirewall (virtual Firewall) that is going to be deployed at
> my IaaS Cloud Provider.
>
> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>
> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.
>
> My Google-Fu seems to indicate either XFS or JFS; what do you think?
>
> Rgds,
>
>
> --
> --
> Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer
> My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/
>


--
--
Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer
My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/
 
Old 09-06-2011, 06:07 PM
Florian Philipp
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

Am 06.09.2011 19:52, schrieb Pandu Poluan:
> On 2011-09-07, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>> So, can anyone recommend me a filesystem that fulfills my following needs:
>>
>> Scenario: vFirewall (virtual Firewall) that is going to be deployed at
>> my IaaS Cloud Provider.
>>
>> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
>> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>>
>> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.
>>
>> My Google-Fu seems to indicate either XFS or JFS; what do you think?
>>
>> Rgds,
>>
> Sorry, forgot one thing: For the time being, I'm sticking with
> 2.6.39-hardened. Saw too many incompatibility bug with 3.0 (due to
> packages hard-wired to expect the kernel version to begin with "2.6").
>
> Rgds,
>
>

JFS is a pretty good and care-free choice for this. Low resource usage.
Good performance, especially with large files. Although I must admit, I
wouldn't use it anymore since Ext4 is usually good enough for just about
every use-case and tested by more people in new kernel versions
(therefore presumably more stable).

Regards,
Florian Philipp
 
Old 09-06-2011, 06:15 PM
kashani
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

On 9/6/2011 10:26 AM, Pandu Poluan wrote:

So, can anyone recommend me a filesystem that fulfills my following needs:

Scenario: vFirewall (virtual Firewall) that is going to be deployed at
my IaaS Cloud Provider.

Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD

Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.

My Google-Fu seems to indicate either XFS or JFS; what do you think?


I think it's a useless local optimization for no real world gain which
only increases the complexity of your systems. Use the same filesystem
you use on all your other servers.


kashani
 
Old 09-06-2011, 06:55 PM
Permjacov Evgeniy
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

On 09/06/2011 09:26 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> So, can anyone recommend me a filesystem that fulfills my following needs:
>
> Scenario: vFirewall (virtual Firewall) that is going to be deployed at
> my IaaS Cloud Provider.
>
> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>
> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.
>
> My Google-Fu seems to indicate either XFS or JFS; what do you think?
>
> Rgds,
>
>
The best fs for emerge is tmpfs on TMP_PORTDIR. I run box with tmpfs on
both /var/tmp and /tmp and happy with it -)

For fs CPU usage is nothing, IO usage is a real problem and weak point.
Thus, you are free to choose any fs with full journaling. ext3 allows
full journaling as option, as well as ext4 and ext4 is little faster if
tuned properly. JFS/XFS journals metadata only. Remember that journaling
makes writes (i.e. emerge) a bit slower.
 
Old 09-06-2011, 07:18 PM
Michael Mol
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Permjacov Evgeniy <permeakra@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/06/2011 09:26 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>> So, can anyone recommend me a filesystem that fulfills my following needs:
>>
>> Scenario: vFirewall (virtual Firewall) that is going to be deployed at
>> my IaaS Cloud Provider.
>>
>> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
>> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>>
>> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.
>>
>> My Google-Fu seems to indicate either XFS or JFS; what do you think?
>>
>> Rgds,
>>
>>
> The best fs for emerge is tmpfs on TMP_PORTDIR. I run box with tmpfs on
> both /var/tmp and /tmp and happy with it -)

Watch out that some ebuilds can and will fail if you exceed the
capacity of your tmpfs. Numerous factors will contribute to the space
required by portage during an emerge.

--
:wq
 
Old 09-06-2011, 07:24 PM
James Broadhead
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

On 6 September 2011 19:55, Permjacov Evgeniy <permeakra@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/06/2011 09:26 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
>> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.

You would have to profile this, but I imagine that the best approach
would be to compile in a RAM disk and copy. I think that you're
probably trying to optimise the wrong part of this problem.

As for ext3/ext4, the improvements to fsck alone make ext4 the FS of
choice between the two.

JB
 
Old 09-07-2011, 12:06 PM
Florian Philipp
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

Am 06.09.2011 21:24, schrieb James Broadhead:
> On 6 September 2011 19:55, Permjacov Evgeniy <permeakra@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 09/06/2011 09:26 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
>>> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>>> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.
>
> You would have to profile this, but I imagine that the best approach
> would be to compile in a RAM disk and copy. I think that you're
> probably trying to optimise the wrong part of this problem.
>
> As for ext3/ext4, the improvements to fsck alone make ext4 the FS of
> choice between the two.
>
> JB
>

Pandu is building a firewall. Putting a ton of RAM in it just for the
sake for system updates is plain overkill and -- depending on his IaaS
provider -- pretty expensive.

Regards,
Florian Philipp
 
Old 09-07-2011, 12:23 PM
Pandu Poluan
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 19:06, Florian Philipp <lists@binarywings.net> wrote:
> Am 06.09.2011 21:24, schrieb James Broadhead:
>> On 6 September 2011 19:55, Permjacov Evgeniy <permeakra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 09/06/2011 09:26 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>>> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
>>>> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>>>> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.
>>
>> You would have to profile this, but I imagine that the best approach
>> would be to compile in a RAM disk and copy. I think that you're
>> probably trying to optimise the wrong part of this problem.
>>
>> As for ext3/ext4, the improvements to fsck alone make ext4 the FS of
>> choice between the two.
>>
>> JB
>>
>
> Pandu is building a firewall. Putting a ton of RAM in it just for the
> sake for system updates is plain overkill and -- depending on his IaaS
> provider -- pretty expensive.
>

Indeed. If I need more RAM, they will only sell a complete package of
vCPU+RAM+Storage, which will then be merged with my current package.

They do offer Storage-only add-on packages, though. But that's beside the point.

Rgds,
--
FdS Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~

*• LOPSA Member #15248
*• Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com
*• Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan
 
Old 09-07-2011, 12:25 PM
Pandu Poluan
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 01:15, kashani <kashani-list@badapple.net> wrote:
> On 9/6/2011 10:26 AM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>
>> So, can anyone recommend me a filesystem that fulfills my following needs:
>>
>> Scenario: vFirewall (virtual Firewall) that is going to be deployed at
>> my IaaS Cloud Provider.
>>
>> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
>> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>>
>> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.
>>
>> My Google-Fu seems to indicate either XFS or JFS; what do you think?
>
> * * * *I think it's a useless local optimization for no real world gain
> which only increases the complexity of your systems. Use the same filesystem
> you use on all your other servers.
>

Well, for all my other servers, I standardized on ext4.

Since a vFirewall have to perform lots of packet-juggling, I'd rather
dedicate the CPU time to the kernel rather than the HD I/O.

Of course, a vFirewall needs to be updated every now and then, but
everytime an update is called for, it should not overly tax the CPU
and degrade the netfilter framework.

Rgds,
--
FdS Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~

*• LOPSA Member #15248
*• Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com
*• Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan
 
Old 09-07-2011, 12:28 PM
Pandu Poluan
 
Default Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge performance, and stable?

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 02:24, James Broadhead <jamesbroadhead@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6 September 2011 19:55, Permjacov Evgeniy <permeakra@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 09/06/2011 09:26 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>> Disk I/O Characteristic: Occasional writes during 'normal' usage,
>>> once-a-week eix-sync + emerge -avuD
>>> Priority: Stable (i.e., less chance of corruption), least CPU usage.
>
> You would have to profile this, but I imagine that the best approach
> would be to compile in a RAM disk and copy. I think that you're
> probably trying to optimise the wrong part of this problem.
>

Hmmm... that gives me an idea...

If I have some free time, I'll experiment with doing an 'emerge -e
@world' on the various filesystems, and recording their total time
*and* CPU load.

Is the `sar` utility good enough to record CPU load?

Rgds,
--
FdS Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~

*• LOPSA Member #15248
*• Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com
*• Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:46 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org