lseek and write question

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • golden

    #1

    lseek and write question

    Hello,

    I am going to ask a question regarding
    write and lseek. I will provide code at the end of this, but first
    some background.


    I am trying to identify the cause of some latency in writing to disk.
    My user claims that performance is much slower on SAN than on local
    disk. The developer provided me a C++ program that performed a write
    test that confirmed his suspicions. I modified the code to better
    fit
    my needs which it does now.


    What I found during the test is that fsync is an expensive operation
    and will block waiting for a confirmation from the disk device. What
    I am trying to understand is the lseek function.


    From what I read, it simply moves the pointer in the file descriptor
    as directed. When I use this lseek function, writes are faster.


    My question is why? When I use the write command, does the pointer
    get reset and on each write, it will search for EOF?


    This is running Linux sytem.


    Thanks in advance:


    #include <sys/types.h>
    #include <sys/time.h>


    #include <errno.h>
    #include <fcntl.h>
    #include <stdio.h>
    #include <stdlib.h>
    #include <string.h>
    #include <unistd.h>


    int main(int argc, char **argv)
    {
    struct timeval start, end;
    double usecs;
    long val;
    int ch, fd, idx, ops, numThreads;
    char *fname= "";
    int filesize = 40000000;
    int bytes = 0;
    bool dosync = true, doSeek=false;


    bytes = 0;
    ops = 0;
    char *buf = new char[bytes];
    fname = argv[1];


    while (( ch = getopt(argc,arg v, "b:o:f:sl") ) != EOF)
    switch (ch) {
    case 'b' :
    bytes = atoi(optarg);
    break;
    case 'o' :
    ops = atoi(optarg);
    break;
    case 'f' :
    fname = (optarg);
    break;
    case 's' :
    dosync = false;
    break;
    case 'l' :
    doSeek = true;
    break;
    }
    argc -= optind;
    argv += optind;


    gettimeofday(&s tart,NULL);


    memset(buf,0,by tes);
    if ( dosync ) {
    printf("Process ing %d bytes with %d Operations of fsync :
    \t", bytes,ops);
    } else {
    printf("Process ing %d bytes with %d Operations of fsync :
    \t", bytes,1);
    }


    // unlink(fname);
    if ((fd = open(fname, O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0666)) == -1)
    {
    int errNum = errno;
    printf("ERROR: failed to open %s: n",fname);
    return(0);
    }


    for ( int idx(0) ; idx < ops ; idx++)
    {


    if (write(fd, buf, bytes) != bytes)
    {
    printf("write: \n");
    exit (1);
    }


    if ( dosync ) {
    if (fsync(fd) != 0)
    {
    printf("fsync: \n");
    exit (1);
    }
    }
    if ( doSeek )
    {
    if (lseek(fd, (off_t)0, SEEK_SET) == -1)
    {
    printf("lseek: %s\n",
    strerror(errno) );
    exit (1);
    }
    }


    }


    // One last sync


    if (fsync(fd) != 0)
    {
    printf("fsync: \n");
    exit (1);
    }
    gettimeofday(&e nd,NULL);


    int totalSec = 0;
    long totalUSec = 0;


    if (start.tv_usec end.tv_usec) {
    end.tv_usec += 1000000;
    end.tv_sec--;
    }


    totalSec = end.tv_sec - start.tv_sec;
    totalUSec = end.tv_usec - start.tv_usec;
    int t = totalSec + (totalUSec / 1000000);


    printf("%ld Hours ",t / ( 60 * 60));
    t %= (60*60);
    printf("%ld Minutes ",t / 60);
    t %= 60;
    printf("%ld.%ld Seconds ",t ,totalUSec);
    printf("%ld.%ld Seconds\n ",totalSec ,totalUSec);
    }
  • Victor Bazarov

    #2
    Re: lseek and write question

    golden wrote:
    I am going to ask a question regarding
    write and lseek. I will provide code at the end of this, but first
    some background.
    [..]
    What I found during the test is that fsync is an expensive operation
    and will block waiting for a confirmation from the disk device. What
    I am trying to understand is the lseek function.
    >
    >
    From what I read, it simply moves the pointer in the file descriptor
    as directed. When I use this lseek function, writes are faster.
    >
    >
    My question is why? When I use the write command, does the pointer
    get reset and on each write, it will search for EOF?
    >
    >
    This is running Linux sytem.
    >
    [..]
    First a nit pick: 'write' is not a command. It's a function. IIRC,
    it's a POSIX function, which isn't really on topic here. Now that's
    out of the way, second, in C++ we'd use the 'fwrite' function (from
    the C Standard Library). Have you tried switching to using 'fwrite'
    instead?

    And the last point: you might want to consider asking in the Linux
    newsgroup since I/O performance depends greatly on the platform, and
    there is no real explanation from the language point of view why
    'write' is so slow without 'lseek'.

    V
    --
    Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
    I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask


    Comment

    • golden

      #3
      Re: lseek and write question

      On Nov 16, 3:45 pm, "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abaza...@com Acast.netwrote:
      golden wrote:
      I am going to ask a question regarding
      write and lseek. I will provide code at the end of this, but first
      some background.
      [..]
      What I found during the test is that fsync is an expensive operation
      and will block waiting for a confirmation from the disk device. What
      I am trying to understand is the lseek function.
      >
      From what I read, it simply moves the pointer in the file descriptor
      as directed. When I use this lseek function, writes are faster.
      >
      My question is why? When I use the write command, does the pointer
      get reset and on each write, it will search for EOF?
      >
      This is running Linux sytem.
      >
      [..]
      >
      First a nit pick: 'write' is not a command. It's a function. IIRC,
      it's a POSIX function, which isn't really on topic here. Now that's
      out of the way, second, in C++ we'd use the 'fwrite' function (from
      the C Standard Library). Have you tried switching to using 'fwrite'
      instead?
      >
      And the last point: you might want to consider asking in the Linux
      newsgroup since I/O performance depends greatly on the platform, and
      there is no real explanation from the language point of view why
      'write' is so slow without 'lseek'.
      >
      V
      --
      Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
      I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
      Thanks... the nitpicking will make me better, so I welcome that. I am
      so used to programming in perl the "command" seems automatic. I will
      try the fwrite and visit the linux group. Thanks for the reply.

      Comment

      • James Kanze

        #4
        Re: lseek and write question

        On Nov 16, 9:45 pm, "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abaza...@com Acast.netwrote:
        golden wrote:
        I am going to ask a question regarding
        write and lseek. I will provide code at the end of this, but first
        some background.
        [..]
        What I found during the test is that fsync is an expensive operation
        and will block waiting for a confirmation from the disk device. What
        I am trying to understand is the lseek function.
        From what I read, it simply moves the pointer in the file descriptor
        as directed. When I use this lseek function, writes are faster.
        My question is why? When I use the write command, does the pointer
        get reset and on each write, it will search for EOF?
        This is running Linux sytem.
        [..]
        First a nit pick: 'write' is not a command. It's a function. IIRC,
        it's a POSIX function, which isn't really on topic here. Now that's
        out of the way, second, in C++ we'd use the 'fwrite' function (from
        the C Standard Library). Have you tried switching to using 'fwrite'
        instead?
        It won't work. He's using a functionality (synchronized
        writing) which isn't available in the standard library. The
        most you can ever guarantee with the standard library (either
        FILE* or iostream) is that the data has been transfered to the
        OS; his call to fsych guarantees that it has been physically
        written on the medium.
        And the last point: you might want to consider asking in the Linux
        newsgroup since I/O performance depends greatly on the platform, and
        there is no real explanation from the language point of view why
        'write' is so slow without 'lseek'.
        With regards to his particular question, the answer seems
        obvious (and will probably be the same on any system, anytime he
        doesn't use synchronized writes): because of the seek, he's
        always writing the data at the same place on the disk, which
        means that the system can always reuse the same sector cache,
        and never has to go to disk. Without the seek, he's writing a
        fairly large file, and the system probably won't keep all of the
        cached data around, but will write to disk.

        Is it really surprising that writing a file with one record is
        significantly faster than writing one with ops records (where
        ops is probably fairly large)?

        --
        James Kanze (GABI Software) email:james.kan ze@gmail.com
        Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
        Beratung in objektorientier ter Datenverarbeitu ng
        9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34

        Comment

        Working...