linux-ext4 - Re: A doubt on journal_async

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:	Fri, 12 Dec 2014 09:54:43 -0500
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	alex chen <alex.chen@...wei.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: A doubt on journal_async_commit option

On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 02:03:32PM +0800, alex chen wrote:
> This commit 0e3d2a6313(ext4: Fix async commit mode to be safe by using
> a barrier) show that using journal_async_commit feature has a 50%
> performance improvement. But I tested in SUSE Linux Enterprise Server
> 11 SP3(linux kernel 3.0.93) and Red Hat Enterprise linux 6.4(linux
> kernel 2.6.32), the result show this feature has no performance
> improvement.
> My test command:
> mount /dev/sdb /mnt/sdb
> ./fs_mark  -d  /mnt/sdb/  -s  10240  -n  1000
> umount
> 
> mount /dev/sdb /mnt/sdb -o journal_async_commit
> ./fs_mark  -d  /mnt/sdb/  -s  10240  -n  1000
> umount
> 
> My test result:
> FSUse%        Count         Size    Files/sec     App Overhead
>      6         1000        10240         42.1            10671
> vs.
> -o journal_async_commit
> FSUse%        Count         Size    Files/sec     App Overhead
>      6         1000        10240         63.9            10625

Um, the files per second went up from 42.1 to 63.9 --- that's a 50%
improvement, yes?

							- Ted
--
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