From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 2 09:58:40 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD10D1065674 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 09:58:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (cain.gsoft.com.au [203.31.81.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E920F8FC18 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 09:58:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ur.gsoft.com.au (Ur.gsoft.com.au [203.31.81.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p729gORK052555 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 2 Aug 2011 19:12:29 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 From: "Daniel O'Connor" In-Reply-To: <20110802090830.GA92646@icarus.home.lan> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 19:12:24 +0930 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <960112E7-2331-449A-8736-C8790B05FE20@gsoft.com.au> References: <20110802090830.GA92646@icarus.home.lan> To: Jeremy Chadwick X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3) X-Spam-Score: -4.164 () ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 203.31.81.10 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, "seanrees@gmail.com" Subject: Re: ZFS directory with a large number of files X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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, 02 Aug 2011 09:58:40 -0000 On 02/08/2011, at 18:38, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 08:39:03AM +0100, seanrees@gmail.com wrote: >> On my FreeBSD 8.2-S machine (built circa 12th June), I created a >> directory and populated it over the course of 3 weeks with about 2 >> million individual files. >=20 > I'll keep this real simple: >=20 > Why did you do this? >=20 > I hope this was a stress test of some kind. If not: >=20 > This is the 2nd or 3rd mail in recent months from people saying "I > decided to do something utterly stupid with my filesystem[1] and now = I'm > asking why performance sucks". >=20 > Why can people not create proper directory tree layouts to avoid this > problem regardless of what filesystem is used? I just don't get it. >=20 > [1]: Applies to any filesystem, not just ZFS. There was a UFS one a > month or two ago too=85 The problem is that he is being punished with shitty FS performance even = though the directory structure is now non-silly. It sounds like the FS hasn't GC'd some (now unneeded) metadata.. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C