GNU bug report logs - #51787
GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 51787 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 18:05:08 +0100

Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org> 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 — 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=1547MiB/s (1622MB/s), 1547MiB/s-1547MiB/s (1622MB/s-1622MB/s), io=3055MiB (3203MB), run=1975-1975msec
>>   WRITE: bw=527MiB/s (553MB/s), 527MiB/s-527MiB/s (553MB/s-553MB/s), io=1042MiB (1092MB), run=1975-1975msec
>
> 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’ll time both.  I’ll need to get more space first.  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’m just happy neither of us has to do this alone.  Thank you!

-- 
Ricardo

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.