Re: bonnie++ benchmarks for ext2,ext3,ext4,jfs,reiserfs,xfs,zfs on software raid 5

[Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 09:39:39PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > Extrapolating these %cpu number makes ZFS the fastest.
> > 
> > Are you sure these numbers are correct?
> 
> Note, that %cpu numbers for fuse filesystems are inherently skewed,
> because the CPU usage of the filesystem process itself is not taken
> into account.
> 
> So the numbers are not all that good, but according to the zfs-fuse
> author it hasn't been optimized yet, so they may improve.

Also, something which is data i/o intensive is going to be the best
case for a FUSE filesystem.  If you try something which is much more
metadata intensive (i.e., lots of file creates and deletes, chmods,
etc.) like say with a Postmark benchmark, you would almost certainly
get very different results.  That's not to say that bonnie++
benchmarks aren't useful, but when doing comparisons between
filesystems, it's a good idea to use a wide variety of benchmarks to
avoid getting potentially misleading results.

					- Ted
-
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/