From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 2IjbMQHGwGHmrwAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 19:05:53 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id 4PabLQHGwGHPPwAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 18:05:53 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E1AD13370 for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 19:05:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:42976 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzN2m-0006bC-HO for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:05:52 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:45176) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzMAu-0003uc-2X for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:10:13 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:39760) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzMAk-0000JL-Mp for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:10:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzMAk-0006Pe-I5 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:10:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:10:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164002015624584 (code B ref 51787); Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:10:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Dec 2021 17:09:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51306 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzMA0-0006OS-FV for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:09:16 -0500 Received: from sender3-of-o52.zoho.com ([136.143.184.52]:21825) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzM9y-0006OH-Kk for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:09:15 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1640020142; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=MvNsUk+rwORfasj6KHkegIkcbfSy2VRbpW6BqOSN26QYt6i0gcCoNhEVc05+wrgtbH1dKRUk/SORD6JXRadQPdTwZ9xvNvO6CYSHOe30FOsp9NvDN2PWRmdD2kTuQ8KchEi+5KwSUjL3hElKE/Z53ejA9709fwoMa3WnPZ8ti6Q= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1640020142; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=Srh+d2fQ4E4iG4E1DV7TLhqynfH2bnQi/pkoK3qRZVI=; b=SR0P0w3ddXAbXEPbZEzaqBzVAmaPtNh0Q7YUOqyjANJV9MdaYwRgQa2LSDPblCrZQcM6Ksjyh8g+fJEMvecu7eWjEL/sOivbmSPKX+mFJFZT8nS+YexyZziZ3Y9Qxh/VGMXKgMQzuRBT8Naq3n+elp/pjUlxGaawzRUd7WyHeCY= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1640020142; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=Srh+d2fQ4E4iG4E1DV7TLhqynfH2bnQi/pkoK3qRZVI=; b=LiNjnmvZVB51GNT6VLu9VqCrs9ECLKkPv50zmtQvb1J1gZFeZ2Y9hnLJUsN6RNLD m6ptsIcU3DRPK5H0AM+GD7oCxzayyeUMinSFfc1FMKSjVc2R2Sui8grG4esFNNYQI8V IRuBSyGAUidTL3fUXDCeVVkJwJtH1sDsSPNP/Ecc= Received: from localhost (p54ad4ec1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.78.193]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 164002014099628.77387882910216; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 09:09:00 -0800 (PST) References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 18:05:08 +0100 In-reply-to: <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1640023553; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=Srh+d2fQ4E4iG4E1DV7TLhqynfH2bnQi/pkoK3qRZVI=; b=WlEw4+cGv+FcTtuDCR7KL8m6zsoNq3q1MyiiTFUQgbAnSzxQ9+c7cjfu1bHZRXfp5qvjny 4BwCC3sqXiNOmpSNSDgEAJJSkPHj/wzRMvyGEmH7PgMsCZv7gJjidzzEvdNMpgS7NT4/0+ kvZ3332x1h2JLmPa3eHk35Kx4n9N8xPIds2vxCM/lRGwj4KB6KVsfgBpLJOQUx7z/prFQw iBbDRCExoPC5a6qWBZVztpfQCAV4W+TXKVTA6o2lWmA0L9xqjVwHq20kaiAsGe/OpE4tca ZEWxK8LhCDqZGyEXXIUb1kv5V42PpJ1d1+irYys6LOa2Nxvh+zDWsdtY9A9lbw== ARC-Seal: i=2; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1640023553; a=rsa-sha256; cv=fail; b=kU4kO/G+U1ziAXGdTexEt5bnkQGj6S6+v1kdEP67fBuQ4TukuFm2V6yHCH6Oa30+aJnvzx 9err28wTqji4Y4VyYghnie6Ci5xV1AVxCqJAhNkejNxxoOYrumriDJs17pOxM0EOWYBbcc xh4poIxlw0B+p60AWI6jScLXJMR1Mzw3l1GkRhgYJmrVHXIjtft+BBKeVRcaLEUf7eea2d er/XnB1l8UhWtb36+vrOalMRNtFVwQFjTM923mVHt1RRnn/2kl2XxP8D+hPhpEXrOeAZru EKd4eq5DC0NCqg37F8RyCdh6Ltcjve8KDSXlmoLGySD+F2zodSBcq0qVK+WLzA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=elephly.net header.s=zoho header.b=LiNjnmvZ; arc=reject ("signature check failed: fail, {[1] = sig:zohomail.com:reject}"); dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -0.02 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=elephly.net header.s=zoho header.b=LiNjnmvZ; arc=reject ("signature check failed: fail, {[1] = sig:zohomail.com:reject}"); dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 6E1AD13370 X-Spam-Score: -0.02 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: uSBC95kpQwvr Mathieu Othacehe writes: >> This is still pretty bad, but better than the <1M performance suggested >> by previous runs. > > Mmh interesting, I also have a x10 speed up on sdb by increasing the > block size from 4k to 512k. I'm not sure what conclusion should we draw > from this observation. As a general rule, we want the block size to match that of the configured disk layout =E2=80=94 if we care about getting the best numbers = in our benchmarks. With real workloads things are always going to be slower anyway. > In particular for our most urging matter, /gnu/store/trash > removal. Moving to a faster hard drive would definitely help here, but I > still don't understand if that disk performance regression comes from > Linux, the file-system fragmentation, or the disk itself. > >> READ: bw=3D1547MiB/s (1622MB/s), 1547MiB/s-1547MiB/s (1622MB/s-1622MB= /s), io=3D3055MiB (3203MB), run=3D1975-1975msec >> WRITE: bw=3D527MiB/s (553MB/s), 527MiB/s-527MiB/s (553MB/s-553MB/s), i= o=3D1042MiB (1092MB), run=3D1975-1975msec > > Wooh that's fast! On test could be to copy the /gnu/store/trash content > to the SAN an observe how long that it takes for this operating to > complete. Do you mean time the copy or time the removal from that storage? You know what, I=E2=80=99ll time both. I=E2=80=99ll need to get more space fir= st. I think the trash directory is larger than the 500G that I got for testing the SAN. > Thanks for your support on that complex topic :) Hey, I=E2=80=99m just happy neither of us has to do this alone. Thank you! --=20 Ricardo