From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 1 00:01:27 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAA15CFC for ; Tue, 1 Jan 2013 00:01:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kamikaze@bsdforen.de) Received: from mail.server1.bsdforen.de (bsdforen.de [82.193.243.81]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 859768FC08 for ; Tue, 1 Jan 2013 00:01:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mobileKamikaze.norad (HSI-KBW-134-3-231-194.hsi14.kabel-badenwuerttemberg.de [134.3.231.194]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.server1.bsdforen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74C11861F0 for ; Tue, 1 Jan 2013 00:55:12 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <50E225DF.3090004@bsdforen.de> Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:55:11 +0100 From: Dominic Fandrey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Post 9.1 stable file system problems X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:01:27 -0000 I have a Tinderbox that I just updated to the current RELENG_9. Following the update build times for packages have increased by a factor between 5 and 20. I.e. I have packages that used to build in 5 minutes and now take an hour. I'm suspecting the file system ever since I saw that the majority of CPU load was caused by ls when I looked at top (more than 2 minutes of CPU time were counted that moment). The majority of the time most of the CPU load is caused by bsdtar, pkg_add, qmake-qt4, etc. Without exception tools that access a lot of files. The file system on which packages are built is nullfs mounted from an async mounted UFS. I turned async off, to no avail. /usr/src/UPDATING says that there were nullfs optimisations. So I think this is where the problem originates. I might hack the tinderbox to use 'ln -s' or set it up for NFS to verify this. -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?