http://edgystuff.tumblr.com/post/81219256714/tips-to-check-and-improve-your-storage-io
Which specifies: SERVER-13417 <http://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=https%3A%2F%2Fjira.mongodb.org%2Fbrowse%2FSERVER-13417&t=MDk2ZWYxNDBjZjcxNDkwODQ1YmYyNDZjZjU1ZDU0YTlhODE1NmM0MyxXcEY4cXhmTQ%3D%3D&b=t%3Ax6OZEfmA-wU2yrtBgvccww&p=http%3A%2F%2Fedgystuff.tumblr.com%2Fpost%2F81219256714%2Ftips-to-check-and-improve-your-storage-io&m=1> You might be right on XFS... We are testing today. On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Will Martin <wmartin...@outlook.com> wrote: > I'd like to see the MongoDB report(?). ext4fs design specifications > includes support for large files via allocation placement. MongoDB, the > last time I checked, does pre-allocation which gives it the performance > benefit of ext4fs multiple design factors (Block and Inode Allocation > Policy), but the disadvantage of having to rebuild when file lengths are > being exceeded; at which time the disk fragmentation may prevent ext4fs > from getting the allocation pattern it was designed for. > > That design feature is going to be unavailable with Solr where ext4fs > dynamic allocation features are less deterministic. Other performance > factors on ext4fs, and mutexes (even with guard mutexes) are pretty > standard patterns. The threaded calls sound like the advantages of the > allocation pattern. > > Still those statements, *based on a dated reading of mine*, may be out of > date with the MongoDB report factors. > > "ext4 recognizes (better than ext3, anyway) that data locality is > generally a desirably quality of a filesystem" > > https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Ext4_Disk_Layout# > Block_and_Inode_Allocation_Policy > > For AWS AMI, is there an r4 instance type? The c3 and m3 are superseded > with *4 types that have notable improvements in IOPs and don't cost more. > > http://howto.unixdev.net/Test_LVM_Trim_Ext4.html -- not an extended > performance benchmark, but useful to validate discard/TRIM. > > On 12/22/2016 1:32 AM, William Bell wrote: > > So what are people recommending for SOLR on AWS on Amazon AMI - ext4 or > xfs? > > I saw an article about MongoDB - saying performance on Amazon was better > due to a mutex issue on ext4 files and threaded calls. > > I have been using ext4 for a long time, but I am moving to r3.* instances > and TRIM / DISCARD support just appears more supported on XFS. > > > > > > > -- Bill Bell billnb...@gmail.com cell 720-256-8076
