linux-ext4 - Re: Ext4 benchmarks

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]

Message-ID: <4600A1BD.80700@us.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:08:45 -0500
From:	"Jose R. Santos" <jrs@...ibm.com>
To:	Jean-Pierre Dion <jean-pierre.dion@...l.net>
CC:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ext4 benchmarks

Jean-Pierre Dion wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> we already discussed during the conf calls what
> benchmarks should be ran on ext4.
>
> As we have OLS paper on the table we were thinking
> here at Bull what bench t run and on which kernel.
>
> If we want trying to compare ext3 and ext4, I guess we
> should at least show that :
> - ext4 has equivalent perfs than ext3,
>   

Define equivalent performance.

Are the workloads only going to be focused on single repetitive 
operations or simulation of actual desktop/server environments?  How 
about performance on an aged filesystem?
> - improvements done for ext3 are still in ext4 (mb alloc, del alloc...).
>
> So  we were wondering what's best to do :
> - run on 2.6.19 (includes del alloc and mb alloc if I am not wrong),
> - run on 2.6.20 (lacks mb alloc),
>   

What about system configurations?  While a desktop configuration would 
be easy to come by, a server configuration needs a bit more thought.  
Will ext4 perform better than ext3 in a wide range of storage 
configuration that scale from a couple thousands IOPS to several hundred 
thousand IOPS?

Having baseline data on other filesystems like XFS or JFS would be 
interesting as well to see how well ext4 stacks up to the competition. :)
> - select relevant benchs (iozone...).
>   

I haven checked IOzone in quite a bit but last time I checked FFSB had a 
couple of capabilities that are not available in IOzone like multi 
threading on a shared data set and a very customizable IO operations to 
attempt to simulate real IO patterns seen on workloads.  Might be worth 
a look if your interested in compiling a very comprehensive set of results
> What do you think ?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> jean-pierre
>   

-JRS
-
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