all lists on lists.proxmox.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Fabian Grünbichler" <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
	<pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup] backup/verify: improve speed by sorting chunks by inode
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 15:24:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1618404441.noyvv5e419.astroid@nora.none> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210413143536.19004-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>

On April 13, 2021 4:35 pm, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> before reading the chunks from disk in the order of the index file,
> stat them first and sort them by inode number.
> 
> this can have a very positive impact on read speed on spinning disks,
> even with the additional stat'ing of the chunks.
> 
> memory footprint should be tolerable, for 1_000_000 chunks
> we need about ~16MiB of memory (Vec of 64bit position + 64bit inode)
> (assuming 4MiB Chunks, such an index would reference 4TiB of data)
> 
> two small benchmarks (single spinner, ext4) here showed an improvement from
> ~430 seconds to ~330 seconds for a 32GiB fixed index
> and from
> ~160 seconds to ~120 seconds for a 10GiB dynamic index
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
> ---
> it would be great if other people could also benchmark this patch on
> different setups a little (in addition to me), to verify or disprove my results

zfs with single spinner + fast special device, with a (not counted ;)) 
warmup run and everything fitting into cache:

Benchmark #1: stock
  Time (mean ± σ):     21.407 s ±  0.819 s    [User: 20.1 ms, System: 15.2 ms]
  Range (min … max):   21.070 s … 23.078 s    6 runs

Benchmark #2: patched
  Time (mean ± σ):     47.119 s ±  0.018 s    [User: 29.5 ms, System: 15.1 ms]
  Range (min … max):   47.107 s … 47.154 s    6 runs

Summary
  'stock' ran
    2.20 ± 0.08 times faster than 'patched'

same setup, but ARC reduced so that verified data > ARC and we start 
bottle-necking on the spinner:

Benchmark #1: stock
  Time (mean ± σ):     367.821 s ±  0.801 s    [User: 195.9 ms, System: 80.0 ms]
  Range (min … max):   366.840 s … 368.802 s    4 runs

Benchmark #2: patched
  Time (mean ± σ):     406.391 s ±  1.304 s    [User: 188.3 ms, System: 100.8 ms]
  Range (min … max):   404.891 s … 407.919 s    4 runs

Summary
  'stock' ran
    1.10 ± 0.00 times faster than 'patched'

both benchmarks for verifying a datastore with ~12G of on-disk chunk 
data.




  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-14 13:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-13 14:35 Dominik Csapak
2021-04-14 13:24 ` Fabian Grünbichler [this message]
2021-04-14 15:42 ` [pbs-devel] applied: " Thomas Lamprecht
2021-04-14  7:17 [pbs-devel] " Dietmar Maurer
2021-04-14 16:44 Dietmar Maurer
2021-04-15  7:19 ` Fabian Grünbichler

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1618404441.noyvv5e419.astroid@nora.none \
    --to=f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com \
    --cc=pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.
Service provided by Proxmox Server Solutions GmbH | Privacy | Legal