From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 10 12:37:36 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DAEB16A4CE for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 12:37:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.199]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22A9343D3F for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 12:37:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from michael.schuh@gmail.com) Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id a41so947395rng for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 05:37:35 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ct8ZZqD8/HakL04jckdqDYiaAJzzz9v9YklGjaGQKF/rgFawgMk75PCsKkF1AxlsIzHGlj7V4UWwzFl23oslxeq0XhkL3xg813aM2VF3cv8yfKBB/GpX5x7LqCykutkhk2oBDQHxXDdgwblhKhZGRFOgoj5VPbZCsBdin0Ui2lk= Received: by 10.38.10.53 with SMTP id 53mr2041821rnj; Tue, 10 May 2005 05:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.207.79 with HTTP; Tue, 10 May 2005 05:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1dbad31505051005371a503dd9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 14:37:35 +0200 From: Michael Schuh To: Charles Swiger In-Reply-To: <393c3aa463b5360a3d9fbdca81f1cdce@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <1dbad315050510034688a7fb@mail.gmail.com> <393c3aa463b5360a3d9fbdca81f1cdce@mac.com> cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Disk-Performace issue? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Michael Schuh List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 12:37:36 -0000 Hallo Charles, thank you for this hint, but this is not the source.... i have this option as default in my kernels. Iknow that putting tons of files in one directory is not really good for th= e performance. I think also that the way get better by using subdirs. But my problem ist that the performance fall from one moment to another from 100% to ~10%........ this was not linear, ist was not a ramp, it was the grand canion.... or the "Eiger Nordwand". :-)) not that the performance at all is bad. Thank you for your Hint Michael 2005/5/10, Charles Swiger : > On May 10, 2005, at 6:46 AM, Michael Schuh wrote: > > Now i have 2 Directories with ~500.000-600.000 files with an size of > > ~5kByte. > > by copying the files from one disk to another or an direktory on the > > same disk > > (equal behavior), i can see this behavior: > > [ ... ] > > Can anyone explain me from where this behavior can come? > > Come thie eventually from the filesytem, or from my disks, so that > > these are to hot? (I think not) >=20 > Directories are kept as lists. Adding files to the end of a list takes > a longer time, as the list gets bigger. There is a kernel option > called DIRHASH (UFS_DIRHASH?) which can be enabled which will help this > kind of situation out significantly, but even with it, you aren't going > to get great performance when you put a half-million files into a > single directory. >=20 > Try breaking this content up into one or two levels of subdirectories. > See the way the Squid cache works... >=20 > -- > -Chuck >=20 >