Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:35:58 +0000 | From | Jon Burgess <> | Subject | Re: ext2/3 performance regression in 2.6 vs 2.4 for small interleaved writes |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote:
>What filesytem was that with? > > I re-ran the tests again last night and founfd that I had made one mistake in my description.
The really poor results occured with the *ext3* filesystem, not ext2.
"mount" was telling me that the contents of /etc/fstab which was ext2 - but the kernel actually had it mounted it as ext3.
I think I might be able to give a little insight to the "0.34MB/s" and "0.48MB/s" numbers. I think these numbers closely match the theoretical performance rate when a single 4kB write occurs per disk rotation.
4kB * 5400RPM / 60 seconds = 360 kB/s 4kB * 7200RPM / 60 seconds = 480 kB/s
Perhaps the drives that I am running the test on do not have write-caching enabled. By the time the first 4kB write has completed the drive may need to wait a complete rotation before it can do the next write. I don't think it quite explains the difference between ext2 and ext3. Any ideas?
Below are the resuls of ext2/ext3 tests on a new Seagate 80Gb SATA, 8MB Cache, model ST380023AS. The ext3 results are a lot better, perhaps this drive has write caching enabled.
Num streams |1 1 |2 2 |4 4 Filesystem |Write Read |Write Read |Write Read ------------------------------|--------------|-------------- Ext2 |40.17 43.07 |10.88 21.49 |10.13 11.41 ext3-journal |16.06 42.24 | 7.56 16.28 | 7.17 11.25 ext3-ordered |37.31 43.12 | 4.64 15.33 | 5.25 11.28 ext3-writeback |37.33 42.93 | 4.00 14.88 | 2.97 11.26
Jon
- 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/
| |