Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Filesystem performance

  1. #1
    bonadio is offline Loyal Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    88
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Filesystem performance

    Hello

    I am installing a new zimbra server and I am following this guide to improve
    the performance of the server

    Performance Tuning Guidelines for Large Deployments - Zimbra :: Wiki

    In the File System section it suggests to use the following parameters

    -j Create the file system with an ext3 journal.
    -L SOME_LABEL Create a new volume label. Refer to the labels in /etc/fstab
    -O dir_index Use hashed b-trees to speed up lookups in large directories.
    -m 2 Only 2% needs to be reserved for root on large filesystems.
    -i 10240 For message store, option -i should be the expected average message size. Estimate this conservatively, as no. of inodes can not be changed after creation.
    -J size=400 Create a large journal.
    -b 4096 Block size in bytes.
    -R stride=16 Stride is used to tell the file system about the size of the RAID configuration. Stride * block size should be equal to RAID stripe size. For example 4k blocks, 128k RAID stripes would set stride=32.

    What I found is that with the above configuration for the filesystem
    if I run the "bonnie++" benchmark tool in it, it is much slower than with the
    default parameters created by the Fedora 7 installer

    Here is the result of bonnie++ in this partition with the above parameters

    Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
    -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
    Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
    s2 4G 36591 9 17650 3 42325 4 106.7 0
    ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
    -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
    files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
    16 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++
    s2,4G,,,36591,9,17650,3,,,42325,4,106.7,0,16,+++++ ,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++ ,+++

    36591 write speed = 36MB/s


    Here is the result of bonnie++ in a partition formatted by fedora

    Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
    -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
    Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
    s2 4G 59103 15 26123 5 67176 7 122.6 0
    ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
    -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
    files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
    16 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++
    s2,4G,,,59103,15,26123,5,,,67176,7,122.6,0,16,++++ +,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,++++ +,+++

    59103 write speed = 59MB/s

    The difference is 36MB/s with ext3 formatted with zimbra parameters and
    59MB/s formatted by default with fedora (write performance)


    So the question is if those parameters are really important for zimbra
    or if I should leave the partition formatted by fedora as it gives better
    performance in the bonnie++ benchmark?

    Thanks

  2. #2
    uxbod's Avatar
    uxbod is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,017
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Other factors need to be considered, not just the pure throughput. Number of files, average size of files, interleaving, type of underlying storage, RAID, block sizes etc etc.

  3. #3
    bonadio is offline Loyal Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    88
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Ok, but in our case the hardware and the raid wont change, we just need
    to decide the best way to format the partition, with the Zimbra parameters
    or with the Fedora parameters.

    Avarage number of messages will be 10.000 per mailbox and avarage message size 15KB.

    I will try to find which of the zimbra parameters makes the bonnie benchmark much slower.

    []s

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Slow IMAP performance after upgrade to 5.x?
    By DanCody in forum Administrators
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-10-2009, 04:25 PM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-03-2006, 01:29 PM
  3. Zimbra Hardware performance and upgradation
    By mansuper in forum Administrators
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-25-2006, 07:51 PM
  4. Performance, spam and lot more
    By montievv in forum Administrators
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-24-2006, 11:24 AM
  5. ZCS Connector Performance
    By art_hebert in forum Zimbra Connector for Outlook
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-06-2006, 06:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •