lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Mar]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: softupdates and ext2
    From
    Date
    Trevor Johnson <trevor@jpj.net> writes:

    > > I made some benchs and it seems rather fast (about 5 to 10% slower than
    > > the async mount, which is what Linux does).
    >
    > It does that by default, but (for ext2 at least) you can mount with the
    > "sync" option to have at least the metadata written synchronously. It is
    > much slower than the asynchronous way, but I would do it if the unclean
    > shutdowns couldn't be prevented.

    The reason the "sync" option is so slow is because it makes _all_ writes
    synchronous. The default of sync metadata / async userdata used by most
    Unixen is not noticeably slower than async except for large metadata
    operations like removing large directory trees.

    E.g. when testing with bonnie on a system using sync/async as default,
    there is no visible difference from using "async". But when using "sync"
    on a Linux system, the write performance dropped to ~80kbyte/s (on a
    disk that writes ~8Mbytes/s using "async").

    _
    Mats Lofkvist
    mal@algonet.se

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

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.022 / U:0.700 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site