linux-ext4 - Re: Ext4 without a journal: some benchmark results

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 08 Jan 2009 06:03:57 -0700
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To:	Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ext4 without a journal: some benchmark results

On Jan 07, 2009  11:29 -0800, Curt Wohlgemuth wrote:
> Iozone was run with the following command line:
> 
>       iozone -t (# threads) -s 2g -r 256k -I -T -i0 -i1 -i2
> 
> I.e., throughput mode; 2GiB file; 256KiB buffer; O_DIRECT.  Tests were
> limited to

How much RAM is on the test system?  If the file size is only 2GB then
it will likely fit into RAM, which is possibly why the performance
numbers of all the filesystems is so close together.  The other possibility
is that a single disk is the performance bottleneck and all of the
filesystems can feed a single disk at a reasonable rate.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html