CentOS - Jun 2010 - How can binaries be different when package versions are identical? (mkfs.ext3 on CentOS 5.4)

Situation:  two similar servers, both with CentOS 5.4 64-bit.  Making
an ext3 filesystem on one takes seconds, on the other minutes.

Partition Size    Server 1     Server 2

1 GB                  0.7 sec       0.3 sec

4 GB                  2.5 sec       1.2 sec

40 GB                15 sec        13 min

WTF

e2fsprogs RPM is e2fsprogs-1.39-23.el5 on both systems
mkfs --version reports "util-linux 2.13-pre7" on both systems
mkfs -V reports the same on both systems (mke2fs 1.3 (29-May-2006)
Using EXT2FS Library version 1.39)
file size on mkfs and mkfs.ext3 binaries is identical

However, checksum on these binaries differs across servers, and "cmp"
reports files are different

I took "mkfs" and "mkfs.ext3" from server 1, put them on
server 2, and
got an improvement:

40 GB                15 sec        3 min

Just out of curiousity, I ran "rpm -V e2fsprogs" to see if rpm would
pick up the difference and sure enough, it complained mkfs.ext3
changed.

Both of these servers have CentOS 5.4; Server 1 was installed in Dec
2009, Server 2 in April 2010.

I'd like to:

(a) account for the difference in the binaries, and
(b) see if something else is different that I can make the same to get
the mkfs.ext3 time down to 15 sec on both systems.

Solving (a) should shed light on (b).  Any ideas?

Best,
Aleksey

On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 18:07 -0700, Aleksey Tsalolikhin
wrote:
> Situation:  two similar servers, both with CentOS 5.4 64-bit.  Making
> an ext3 filesystem on one takes seconds, on the other minutes.
> 
> Partition Size    Server 1     Server 2
> 
> 1 GB                  0.7 sec       0.3 sec
> 
> 4 GB                  2.5 sec       1.2 sec
> 
> 40 GB                15 sec        13 min
> 
> WTF
> 
> e2fsprogs RPM is e2fsprogs-1.39-23.el5 on both systems
> mkfs --version reports "util-linux 2.13-pre7" on both systems
> mkfs -V reports the same on both systems (mke2fs 1.3 (29-May-2006)
> Using EXT2FS Library version 1.39)
> file size on mkfs and mkfs.ext3 binaries is identical
> 
> However, checksum on these binaries differs across servers, and
"cmp"
> reports files are different
> 
> I took "mkfs" and "mkfs.ext3" from server 1, put them
on server 2, and
> got an improvement:
> 
> 40 GB                15 sec        3 min
> 
> Just out of curiousity, I ran "rpm -V e2fsprogs" to see if rpm
would
> pick up the difference and sure enough, it complained mkfs.ext3
> changed.
> 
> Both of these servers have CentOS 5.4; Server 1 was installed in Dec
> 2009, Server 2 in April 2010.
> 
> I'd like to:
> 
> (a) account for the difference in the binaries, and
> (b) see if something else is different that I can make the same to get
> the mkfs.ext3 time down to 15 sec on both systems.
> 
> Solving (a) should shed light on (b).  Any ideas?
----
I think the answer is in your original statement - 'two similar servers'

Similar says, not exactly and the hard drives, controller and RAID
configuration differences would be the first place to look for your
answer.

Craig



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

Aleksey Tsalolikhin <atsaloli.tech at gmail.com>
wrote:
> (a) account for the difference in the binaries, and
> (b) see if something else is different that I can make the same to get
> the mkfs.ext3 time down to 15 sec on both systems.
> Solving (a) should shed light on (b).  Any ideas?
Look into prelinking (man prelink). A prelinker from /etc/cron.daily
that changes the binaries with an aim to speed up execution.


-- 
Spiro Harvey                  Knossos Networks Ltd
021-295-1923                  www.knossos.net.nz
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20100630/938c3f78/attachment.sig>