[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: filesystem benchmarking fun

    On May 16 2007 10:42, Chris Mason wrote:
    >For example, I'll pick on xfs for a minute. compilebench shows the
    >default FS you get from mkfs.xfs is pretty slow for untarring a bunch of
    >kernel trees.

    I suppose you used 'nobarrier'? [ ]

    >Dave Chinner gave me some mount options that make it
    >dramatically better,

    and `mkfs.xfs -l version=2` is also said to make it better

    >but it still writes at 10MB/s on a sata drive that
    >can do 80MB/s. Ext3 is better, but still only 20MB/s.
    >Both are presumably picking a reasonable file and directory layout.
    >Still, our writeback algorithms are clearly not optimized for this kind
    >of workload. Should we fix it?

    Also try with tmpfs.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-05-16 20:17    [W:0.233 / U:4.444 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site