lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: getdents - ext4 vs btrfs performance
    On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 03:03:53PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
    > 2012/3/1 Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>:
    > > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Jacek Luczak <difrost.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> While I was about to grab acp I've noticed seekwatcher with made my day :)
    > >>
    > >> seekwatcher run of tar cf to eliminate writes (all done on 3.2.7):
    > >> 1) btrfs: http://dozzie.jarowit.net/~dozzie/luczajac/tar_btrfs.png
    > >> 2) ext4: http://dozzie.jarowit.net/~dozzie/luczajac/tar_ext4.png
    > >> 3) both merged: http://dozzie.jarowit.net/~dozzie/luczajac/tar_btrfs_ext4.png

    Whoa, seekwatcher makes it pretty clear.

    > >>
    > >> I will send acp results soon.
    > >>
    > > Would you please take reiserfs into account?
    >
    > As of now not (lack of time) but I'm pretty close to consider XFS in
    > the game. Whenever I will have more time and there won't be a pressure
    > on giving host back to production I will redo same tests for reiserfs.
    >
    > Now I'm focused on the userspace sorting results.

    reiserfs should have results very similar to ext4. The directory
    hashing used by reiserfs is going to result in a very random read
    pattern.

    XFS will probably beat btrfs in this test. Their directory indexes
    reflect on disk layout very well.

    -chris


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-03-01 15:21    [W:0.022 / U:118.220 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site