Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 03 Sep 2004 09:25:28 -0700 | From | Hans Reiser <> | Subject | Re: A few filesystem benchmarks w/ReiserFS4 vs Other Filesystems |
| |
Alexander Lyamin wrote:
>Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 05:45:41PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > >>Hi, >> >> >>>Execute rm -rf linux-2.6.8.1 on each file system. >>># -------------------------------------------------------------------- # >>>ext2 | 10.26 sec @ 22% cpu >>>ext3 | 10.02 sec @ 25% cpu >>> jfs | 26.67 sec @ 27% cpu >>> rs3 | 03.22 sec @ 74% cpu >>> rs4 | 25.58 sec @ 50% cpu <- What happened to reiserfs4 here? >>> xfs | 12.51 sec @ 47% cpu >>># -------------------------------------------------------------------- # >>>Create a 500MB file with dd to each filesystem with 1MB blocks. >>># -------------------------------------------------------------------- # >>>ext2 | 15.72 sec @ 26% cpu >>>ext3 | 17.04 sec @ 31% cpu >>> jfs | 29.57 sec @ 25% cpu >>> rs3 | 15.21 sec @ 27% cpu >>> rs4 | 23.96 sec @ 23% cpu <- What happened to reiserfs4 here? >>> >>> Do a dd of a 50GB file, I expect a completely different result. Basically, this is an artifact of reiser4 choosing to flush the whole file once it starts to flush.
>>> xfs | 19.07 sec @ 29% cpu >>> >>> > >Your answers somewhere in HCH's "silent semantics" thread. > >Basically reiserfs team aware that they do suck at file DELETES >and OVERWRITES. There seem to be a way to rectify this perfomance >issues in future (dynamic repacker?). Altough i was somewhat surprised >with this dd file benchmark... probably Alexander Zarochentsev knows >the answer. > >
- 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/
| |