lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 26 Jan 2006 23:30:57 -0800
FromHans Reiser <>
SubjectRe: random minor benchmark: Re: Copy 20 tarfiles: ext2 vs (reiser4, unixfile) vs (reiser4,cryptcompress)
Jens Axboe wrote:

>On Wed, Jan 25 2006, Hans Reiser wrote:> >>>Notice how CPU speed (and number of cpus) completely determines
>>compression performance.>>>>cryptcompress refers to the reiser4 compression plugin, (unix file)
>>refers to the reiser4 non-compressing plugin.>>>>Edward Shishkin wrote:>>>> >>>>>Here are the tests that vs asked for:>>>Creation (dd) of 20 tarfiles (the original 200M file is in ramfs)
>>>Kernel: 2.6.15-mm4 + current git snapshot of reiser4
>>>>>>------------------------------------------>>>>>>Laputa workstation>>>Uni Intel Pentium 4 (2.26 GHz) 512M RAM>>>>>>ext2:>>>real 2m, 15s>>>sys 0m, 14s>>>>>>reiser4(unix file)>>>real 2m, 7s>>>sys  0m, 23s>>>>>>reiser4(cryptcompress, lzo1, 64K)>>>real 2m, 13s>>>sys 0m, 11s>>> >>>>>Just curious - does your crypt plugin reside in user space?
>> >
No, kernel.  It would have to  encrypt+compress with every write to be
in user space, we encrypt+compress only at flush time, and that is a key
optimization (encryption is disabled at the moment due to needing a
little API work, but....) for file sets that are cachable.
-
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/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-01-27 07:34    [from the cache]
©2003-2008