https://jira.whamcloud.com This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 9.4.14 940014 05-12-2023 https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-6361 Lustre <p>It is used for tracing all LFSCK 4 tasks.</p> LU-6361

LFSCK 4: improve LFSCK performance

Improvement Major Resolved Fixed nasf nasf Fri, 13 Mar 2015 00:01:09 +0000 Tue, 5 Feb 2019 00:39:04 +0000 Sat, 30 May 2015 04:27:02 +0000 Lustre 2.8.0 0 6 <p>The patch for measure LFSCK 4 performance:<br/> <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/12109/" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/12109/</a></p> <p>Oleg Drokin (oleg.drokin@intel.com) merged in patch <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/12109/" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/12109/</a><br/> Subject: <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-6361" title="LFSCK 4: improve LFSCK performance" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-6361"><del>LU-6361</del></a> lfsck: measure LFSCK 4 performance<br/> Project: fs/lustre-release<br/> Branch: master<br/> Current Patch Set: <br/> Commit: db2110a7af734f42a3a0b425feade8498c309895</p> <p>Landed for 2.8</p> <p>Hello, has anyone actually used this awesome sounding patch to measure performance?  We have an RFP that wants 1B namespace entries to be fsck'd in 12 hours.  Anyone have any ideas what a reasonable lfsck rate is?  Thanks!</p> <p> </p> <p>Attached are the test results comparing LFSCK phase 3 (DNE support) with LFSCK phase 4 (performance tuning), measured when this work was competed in 2015.</p> LU-1452 LU-1453 LU-5820 LU-5682 LU-6316 LU-6317 LU-6343 LU-6350 LU-6322 LU-6177 LU-6351 Development Rank 1|hzx8g7: Rank (Obsolete) 9223372036854775807 Severity