[lkml]   [2004]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: ext2/3 performance regression in 2.6 vs 2.4 for small interleaved writes
    Rik van Riel wrote:

    > Just for fun, could you also try measuring how long it takes
    > to read back the files in question ?
    > Both individually and in parallel...
    The original code did the read back as well, I stripped it out to make
    the code smaller to post.
    It was the read back performance that I was most interested in. I found
    that ext2/3 interleave all the blocks on the disk. With 2 stream the
    read performance is 50%, 4 streams give 25% etc.

    I have one really bad case where I record a TV stream at 500kByte/s + a
    radio one at 25kByte/s. These blocks are interleaved on the disk and the
    read performance of the radio stream is reduced by the data ratio, i.e.
    1:20, so I get a miserable read performance of ~ 1MB/s.

    I found that ext2, ext3 and Reiserfs behave similarly. XFS and JFS
    appear to coalesce the data blocks during the write phase and can read
    the data back at near maximum performance.


    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: 2005-03-22 14:00    [W:0.020 / U:65.592 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site