[ZFS] refquota is very slow !

[Ben RUBSON]

Same kind of results with a single local (SSD) disk based pool, refquota takes much more time than quota around the limit.

Here is the output for this single disk based pool :
zfs get all   : http://pastebin.com/raw/TScgy0ps
zdb           : http://pastebin.com/raw/BxmQ4xNx
zpool get all : http://pastebin.com/raw/XugMbydy

Thank you !

Ben


> On 04 Sep 2016, at 13:42, InterNetX - Juergen Gotteswinter <juergen.gotteswinter at internetx.com> wrote:
> 
> Did you try the same in a single local disk based pool? And pls post output of
> zfs get all, zdb & zpool get all
> 
> 
>> Ben RUBSON <ben.rubson at gmail.com> hat am 4. September 2016 um 11:28
>> geschrieben:
>> 
>> 
>> Juergen & Bram,
>> 
>> Thank you for your feedback.
>> 
>> I then investigated further and think I found the root cause.
>> 
>> No issue with refquota in my zroot pool containing (in this example) 300.000
>> inodes used.
>> 
>> However, refquota is terribly slow in my data pool containing around
>> 12.000.000 inodes used.
>> 
>> I then created 12.000.000 empty file in my zroot pool, in a test dataset.
>> I put a refquota on this dataset and created a dd file to fulfil empty space.
>> And around the limit, it began to stall...
>> I then created an empty dataset in the same pool, refquota is even slow in
>> this dataset having no inode used.
>> The root cause seems then to be the total number of inodes used in the pool...
>> 
>> Some numbers :
>> Time to fulfil 512MB with quota : 17s
>> Time to fulfil 512MB with refquota : 3m35s
>> 
>> Very strange.
>> 
>> Do you experience the same thing ?
>> 
>> Thank you again,
>> 
>> Ben
>> 
>>> On 03 Sep 2016, at 16:59, Bram Vandoren <bram.vandoren at kuleuven.be> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I encountered the same problem over NFS. I didn't manage to reproduce it not
>>> using NFS. I think the userquota property works without any problem though.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Bram.
>> 
>>> On 03 Sep 2016, at 12:26, InterNetX - Juergen Gotteswinter
>>> <juergen.gotteswinter at internetx.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> cant confirm this, works like a charm without difference to normal quota
>>> setting
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-fs at freebsd.org mailing list
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"