Re: [squid-users] Reiser vs etx4

From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov_at_measurement-factory.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 11:27:58 -0600

On 09/04/2013 04:35 AM, Alfredo Rezinovsky wrote:
> In the page reccomends reiserfs. So I tried to set up a squid for
> 200Mbps squid using reiser and squid 3.3
>
> I had a problem, every five to ten minutes, the system freezes and the
> bandwith drops to a half for about 10 seconds.

Yes, this is typical for either untuned or overloaded ext2 and ext4 file
systems as well.

> I tried tuning squid in many ways. And I noticed reiser flushes the
> buffers all at a time, freezing the I/O, I suppose even the network I/O.

Yes. AFAIK, _any_ Linux process might be frozen indiscriminately when fs
is running behind its flushing schedule.

> The solution was to reformart the cache disks using ext4 (noatime an
> so). Now the proxy runs smoothly.

In our tests, it was easier to configure ext2 to do the right thing with
respect to flushing than ext4, but we were not using ufs-based
cache_dirs and YMMV.

Also, if you are using ufs-based cache_dirs then you are likely to start
seeing similar overload/flushing effects if your Squid load increases.
Besides fs tuning (to avoid excessive accumulation of unflushed data),
the key is in limiting disk traffic, which ufs-based cache_dirs cannot
do (yet?). On the other hand, ufs-based systems are not meant for
performance-sensitive environments anyway :-).

Cheers,

Alex.
Received on Wed Sep 04 2013 - 17:28:26 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Sep 04 2013 - 12:00:05 MDT