Re: filesystem benchmarking fun

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On May 16 2007 10:42, Chris Mason wrote:
>
>For example, I'll pick on xfs for a minute.  compilebench shows the
>default FS you get from mkfs.xfs is pretty slow for untarring a bunch of
>kernel trees.

I suppose you used 'nobarrier'? [ http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/5/19/33 ]

>Dave Chinner gave me some mount options that make it
>dramatically better,

and `mkfs.xfs -l version=2` is also said to make it better

>but it still writes at 10MB/s on a sata drive that
>can do 80MB/s.  Ext3 is better, but still only 20MB/s. 
>
>Both are presumably picking a reasonable file and directory layout.
>Still, our writeback algorithms are clearly not optimized for this kind
>of workload.  Should we fix it?

Also try with tmpfs.



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

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux