| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4611199A.3050506@bull.net> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 16:56:26 +0200 From: Jean-Pierre Dion <jean-pierre.dion@...l.net> To: jrs@...ibm.com Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Ext4 benchmarks Hi Jose, I have to check with the team here. Will tell you. Thanks. jean-pierre Jose R. Santos wrote: > Jean-Pierre Dion wrote: >> Hi Jose, >> >> thank you for the feedback. >> >> We took your remarks into account and we are doing some perfs with >> iozone (close to desktop activity, mono-thread) and ffsb (allows to >> run benchs >> in a multi-thread activity like a server does, different blocks >> sizes...). >> >> We compare ext3 and ext4 (with extents, w/ and w/o del alloc...)... >> >> We will publish the results on bullopensource.org >> > > Hi Jean-Pierre, > > While it may be to late for the purposes of your OLS paper, one thing > that doesn't seem to be getting much attention is the performance of a > file system while doing many meta-data operations or throughput > testing during heavy journal log activity. I believe that IOzone is > very limited in testing this and FFSB isn't much better at it either. > Eventually, I plan to add support in FFSB to create workload profile > were one can select a weight balance of these types of operations. > > Is this something that you are already doing for this round of testing? > > -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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists