Messages in this thread | | | From | Con Kolivas <> | Subject | Re: [BENCHMARK] ext3, reiser, jfs, xfs effect on contest | Date | Sat, 1 Feb 2003 09:21:59 +1100 |
| |
On Saturday 01 Feb 2003 6:29 am, Hans Reiser wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > >Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com> wrote: > >>compilation is not an effective benchmark anymore, not for Linux > >>filesystems, they are all just too fast (or is it that the compilers are > >>too slow?....) > > > >The point of this test is to measure interactions, and fairness. > > > >It answers the question "how much impact does heavy filesystem I/O have > > upon other system activity?". > > > >The "other system activity" in this test is a kernel compile. That is a > >fairly reasonable metric, because it is sensitive to latencies in > > servicing reads and it is sensitive to inappropriate page replacement > > decisions. > > > >A more appropriate foreground load might be opening a word processor and > >composing a short letter to Aunt Nellie, but that's harder to automate. > > We expect that reduced kernel compilation time will correlate with > > lower-latency letter writing. > > I think the result of the test was that this was not a compelling reason > for users selecting a particular one of the filesystems because they all > did well enough at it. Perhaps because of your code.:) > > However, it is rather interesting for all the reasons you mention. > There is indeed a tendency for benchmarks to discount the importance of > latency, and this benchmark does not do that, which is good. It is > annoying to be unable to work while a big tar is running in the > background, but few benchmarks capture that. > > We should test reiser4 against this next month, it would be > interesting. (It seems we finally fixed the Reiser4 performance problem > that we hit in August, and now we just need to tweak the CPU usage a bit > and we'll have something performing pretty decently in our next > release....)
Actually the most "felt" of these loads is io_load and based on these results: io_load: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2559ext3 3 109 68.8 4 10.1 1.40 2559jfs 3 138 54.3 11 13.8 1.77 2559reiser 3 98 76.5 2 9.2 1.24 2559xfs 3 124 60.5 6 8.0 1.57
I'd say barring any concern about throughput which this doesnt claim to measure accurately reiserfs causes the least slowdown of the system ;-)
I do have one more load which may be useful. dbench_load continually runs dbench in the background. I could throw that at it also.
Ext2 was left out for clarity because it wasn't a journalling fs but it's results are quite different to the journalled fss.
Con - 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/
| |