From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-127818-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1R1ZRj-000203-GW
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 07:54:52 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1BC8B21C31D;
Thu, 8 Sep 2011 07:54:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (unknown [69.65.43.212])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B879D21C23A
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 07:52:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-fx0-f53.google.com ([209.85.161.53])
by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <pandu@poluan.info>)
id 1R1ZPq-001jrv-OD
for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 14:52:54 +0700
Received: by fxd23 with SMTP id 23so1464446fxd.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 00:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.47.75 with SMTP id m11mr28576faf.55.1315468369490; Thu, 08
Sep 2011 00:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.95.207 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 00:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E67ED13.30201@badapple.net>
References: <CAA2qdGVMWtq2jxECcd9ceppT-9jmo3gXbw6f7dhx1GjtOfKGkQ@mail.gmail.com>
<4E666347.2080108@badapple.net>
<CAA2qdGWhMzc4JYm_xKqfRiG8eRFs5Z1-uqQzxKNWpu4a5PMQGA@mail.gmail.com>
<4E67ED13.30201@badapple.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 14:52:49 +0700
Message-ID: <CAA2qdGWCKGAvZucJX8-bC-J3kk8Hnon1Gz3W5GUQMXFvv_DeLA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Filesystem with lowest CPU load, acceptable emerge
performance, and stable?
From: Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info
X-Archives-Salt:
X-Archives-Hash: 08fd598b81ffab9a6b90f7756e7dbd5e
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 05:15, kashani <kashani-list@badapple.net> wrote:
> On 9/7/2011 5:25 AM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>
>> Well, for all my other servers, I standardized on ext4.
>>
>> Since a vFirewall have to perform lots of packet-juggling, I'd rather
>> dedicate the CPU time to the kernel rather than the HD I/O.
>>
>> Of course, a vFirewall needs to be updated every now and then, but
>> everytime an update is called for, it should not overly tax the CPU
>> and degrade the netfilter framework.
>>
>> Rgds,
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0You are making my point for me, but not realiz=
ing the end result of
> the logic. There isn't any filesystem change that is going to affect CPU
> usage by more than a few percentage points in the use case you've describ=
ed.
> Rsync, portage, and gcc use a massive amount of CPU compared to the amoun=
t
> the filesystem changes will use other than brief points during the rsync.
> Additionally most benchmarks are testing filesystem throughput and compar=
ing
> it to CPU. Because disk IO isn't under pressure in your scenario you're
> unlikely to see the pathological use of CPU that can highlight the
> differences between filesystems.
Gosh, you're right! (And Jes=C3=BAs' reply also remind me).
What was I thinking >.<
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0That said, you have a few reasonable choices.
>
> 1. Move to a binary distro
> 2. Use buildpkg on a clone of this server and only install packages on yo=
ur
> Firewall.
> 3. NFS mount /usr/portage when you need it and dist build on another serv=
er
> 4. Don't upgrade
> 5. Get a firewall server with more CPU so that it doesn't matter
> 6. Script a new firewall server install every x months and swap it into
> place and drop the original server.
> 7. Some combination of the above.
>
I think I'll do (6). Attach a HD to another VM, install a similar
system on that HD (chroot-ed, of course), update that regularly, make
a stage5 (or 6 or whatevs) of the (ch)root, then do a 'tar xJf' on the
firewall proper.
So, a different scenario, then: Sometimes I need to log stuffs (via
ULOG) or do a tcpdump. Will JFS give me additional benefit to ext4? Or
should I just stick with ext4?
Rgds,
--=20
FdS Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~
=C2=A0=E2=80=A2 LOPSA Member #15248
=C2=A0=E2=80=A2 Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com
=C2=A0=E2=80=A2 Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan