Re: random minor benchmark: Re: Copy 20 tarfiles: ext2 vs (reiser4, unixfile) vs (reiser4,cryptcompress)

[Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>]

On Thu, Jan 26 2006, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Edward Shishkin wrote:
> 
> >
> > I guess this is because real compression is going in background
> > flush, not in sys_write->write_cryptcompress (which just copies
> > user's data to page cache). So in this case we have something
> > very similar to ext2. Reiser4 plain write (write_unix_file) is
> > more complex, and currently we try to reduce its sys time.
> >
> > Edward.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Which means that only real time is a meaningful measurement.....

Indeed. I guess the compression stuff cost is hard to quantify, since it
has cache effects on the rest of the system in addition to costing CPU
cycles on its own.

A profile of, say, dbench with and without compression would be
interesting to see. And the actual dbench reults, naturally :-)

-- 
Jens Axboe

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/