lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Btrfs v0.16 released
From
Date
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 21:10 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 19:44 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > > I spent a bunch of time hammering on different ways to fix this without
> > > increasing nr_requests, and it was a mixture of needing better tuning in
> > > btrfs and needing to init mapping->writeback_index on inode allocation.
> > >
> > > So, today's numbers for creating 30 kernel trees in sequence:
> > >
> > > Btrfs defaults 57.41 MB/s
> > > Btrfs dup no csum 74.59 MB/s
> > > Btrfs no duplication 76.83 MB/s
> > > Btrfs no dup no csum no inline 76.85 MB/s
> >
> > What sort of script are you using? Basically something like this?
> >
> > for i in `seq 1 30` do
> > mkdir $i; cd $i
> > tar xjf /usr/src/linux-2.6.28.tar.bz2
> > cd ..
> > done
>
> Similar. I used compilebench -i 30 -r 0, which means create 30 initial
> kernel trees and then do nothing. compilebench simulates compiles by
> writing to the FS files of the same size that you would get by creating
> kernel trees or compiling them.
>
> The idea is to get all of the IO without needing to keep 2.6.28.tar.bz2
> in cache or the compiler using up CPU.
>
> http://www.oracle.com/~mason/compilebench

Whoops the link above is wrong, try:

http://oss.oracle.com/~mason/compilebench

It is worth noting that the end throughput doesn't matter quite as much
as the writeback pattern. Ext4 is pretty solid on this test, with very
consistent results.

-chris




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-15 14:49    [W:0.156 / U:3.416 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site