Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [benchmarks] various filesystems on 2.5.68 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Date | 24 Apr 2003 15:31:22 +0200 |
| |
rwhron@earthlink.net writes:
> mount options > mount -t ext2 -o defaults,noatime /dev/sdc1 /fs1 > mount -t ext3 -o defaults,noatime,data=writeback /dev/sdc1 /fs1 > mount -t reiserfs -o defaults,noatime /dev/sdc1 /fs1 > mount -t jfs -o defaults,noatime /dev/sdc1 /fs1 > mount -t xfs -o logbufs=8,logbsize=32768,noatime /dev/sdc1 /fs1 > > mkfs command > mke2fs -q /dev/sdc1 > mke2fs -q -j -J size=400 /dev/sdc1 > yes "y" | mkreiserfs /dev/sdc1 >/tmp/mkr.out 2>&1 > jfs_mkfs -q /dev/sdc1 > mkfs.xfs -l size=32768b -f /dev/sdc1 > > Very recent version of xfsprogs/jfsutils/reiserfsprogs/e2fsprogs. > > XFS mount/mkfs options came from the XFS FAQ and are very desireable > for these tests based on an earlier run without them. If anyone
It's my experience too that XFS often performs badly with the default mkfs/mount options, especially for metadata intensive workloads. The drawback is that it eats memory. I've been thinking about making it set the bigger mount option by default based on the available physical memory; this would probably help a lot of users.
iirc one drawback is that it eats from the vmalloc area which is only 64MB by default on 32bit. But still should not be that big an issue. On 64bit it's not an issue at all of course.
Of course the log size cannot be changed this way, but perhaps the default in mkfs is just too small for today's disk sizes?
-Andi - 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/
| |