[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <473247A3.5020800@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 02:17:55 +0300
From: Alex Tomas <bzzz.tomas@...il.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc: ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: More testing: 4x parallel 2G writes, sequential reads
Hi,
could you try to larger preallocation? like 512/1024/2048 blocks, please?
thanks, Alex
Eric Sandeen wrote:
> I tried ext4 vs. xfs doing 4 parallel 2G IO writes in 1M units to 4
> different subdirectories of the root of the filesystem:
>
> http://people.redhat.com/esandeen/seekwatcher/ext4_4_threads.png
> http://people.redhat.com/esandeen/seekwatcher/xfs_4_threads.png
> http://people.redhat.com/esandeen/seekwatcher/ext4_xfs_4_threads.png
>
> and then read them back sequentially:
>
> http://people.redhat.com/esandeen/seekwatcher/ext4_4_threads_read.png
> http://people.redhat.com/esandeen/seekwatcher/xfs_4_threads_read.png
> http://people.redhat.com/esandeen/seekwatcher/ext4_xfs_4_read_threads.png
>
> At the end of the write, ext4 had on the order of 400 extents/file, xfs
> had on the order of 30 extents/file. It's clear especially from the
> read graph that ext4 is interleaving the 4 files, in about 5M chunks on
> average. Throughput seems comparable between ext4 & xfs nonetheless.
>
> Again this was on a decent HW raid so seek penalties are probably not
> too bad.
>
> -Eric
> -
> 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
>
-
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