Very slow Fedora 22 installation

[Roderick Johnstone]

Hi

Just to report that my install just completed. Thats more than 5 days 
after starting, but it did it!

The "hiding devices" gradually went slower and slower so my predictions 
of how long it was going to take were always way to optimistic.

Roderick

On 18/06/2015 10:42, Roderick Johnstone wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm currently running a Fedora 22 kickstart install to one of our backup
> servers. Its been running for nearly a day now!
>
> The root partition is on ext4 but there is a btrfs file system on top of
> md raid6 that holds our user backups. Each users' files are rsycned to
> the btrfs filesystem and then a snapshot made, so there are many
> thousands of snapshots.
>
> Currently the install has been running for nearly a day (the main screen
> is full of dots). Behind the scenes the installer seems to be working
> its way through all the snapshots with messages like this in storage.log:
>
> 05:11:42,844 INFO blivet: hiding device existing 9.1 TiB btrfs snapshot
> home_xxx/20130423-000501 (59677) with existing btrfs filesystem
> 05:11:42,848 DEBUG blivet: existing RAID raid6 size == 9.1 TiB
> 05:11:42,852 DEBUG blivet: existing RAID raid6 size == 9.1 TiB
> 05:11:42,857 DEBUG blivet: BTRFSVolumeDevice.removeChild: kids: 32903 ;
> name: btrfs.133 ;
> 05:11:42,858 INFO blivet: removed btrfs snapshot
> home_xxx/20130423-000501 (id 59677) from device tree
> 05:11:42,858 DEBUG blivet: lvm filter: adding home_xxx/20130423-000501
> to the reject list
> 05:11:43,540 DEBUG blivet: existing RAID raid6 size == 9.1 TiB
>
> In my kickstart file I have a (legacy) line which I use to make sure
> that there is no possibility of the install happening to the wrong device:
> ignoredisk --only-use=/dev/disk/by-id/ata-ST380815AS_9RA8ZRZK
>
> where ata-ST380815AS_9RA8ZRZK is the disk I want to install the
> operating system to.
>
> Is it possible that this is whats causing the slowness?
>
> I guess I could remove the ignoredisk line now since I use the by-id
> name to identify the disk to install to in the 'part' commands. I think
> we introduced 'ignoredisk' ages ago when we had to specify partitions by
> names like /dev/hda1 and I was caught out once when the disks were
> enumerated in a different order in the installer than in the previous
> operating system I was using and the install happened to the wrong device.
>
> I'm disinclined to interrupt the install at the moment, as it does seem
> to be making progress, but confirmation that removing the 'ignoredisk'
> line would avoid the issue I described would be useful.
>
> Thanks
>
> Roderick Johnstone