On 04/28/2017 09:31 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 04/28/2017 11:17 AM, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
>> Hello, All!
>>
>> Recently we have experienced problems with very slow
>> bdrv_get_block_status call, which is massive called f.e.
>> from mirror_run().
>>
>> The problem was narrowed down to slow lseek64()
On 04/28/2017 09:31 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 04/28/2017 11:17 AM, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
>> Hello, All!
>>
>> Recently we have experienced problems with very slow
>> bdrv_get_block_status call, which is massive called f.e.
>> from mirror_run().
>>
>> The problem was narrowed down to slow lseek64()
On 04/28/2017 10:35 PM, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> On 04/28/2017 09:31 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 04/28/2017 11:17 AM, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
>>> Hello, All!
>>>
>>> Recently we have experienced problems with very slow
>>> bdrv_get_block_status call, which is massive called f.e.
>>> from mirror_run().
On 04/28/2017 11:17 AM, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> Hello, All!
>
> Recently we have experienced problems with very slow
> bdrv_get_block_status call, which is massive called f.e.
> from mirror_run().
>
> The problem was narrowed down to slow lseek64() system
> call, which can take 1-2-3 seconds.
I'
Hello, All!
Recently we have experienced problems with very slow
bdrv_get_block_status call, which is massive called f.e.
from mirror_run().
The problem was narrowed down to slow lseek64() system
call, which can take 1-2-3 seconds.
root@s158 ~]# strace -f -p 77048 -T -e lseek
Process 77048 atta
