[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.01.0912240205510.3483@bogon.housecafe.de>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 02:31:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Christian Kujau <lists@...dbynature.de>
To: xfs@....sgi.com, reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net,
ext-users <ext3-users@...hat.com>, linux-nilfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: benchmark results
I've had the chance to use a testsystem here and couldn't resist running a
few benchmark programs on them: bonnie++, tiobench, dbench and a few
generic ones (cp/rm/tar/etc...) on ext{234}, btrfs, jfs, ufs, xfs, zfs.
All with standard mkfs/mount options and +noatime for all of them.
Here are the results, no graphs - sorry:
http://nerdbynature.de/benchmarks/v40z/2009-12-22/
Reiserfs is locking up during dbench, so I removed it from the
config, here are some earlier results:
http://nerdbynature.de/benchmarks/v40z/2009-12-21/bonnie.html
Bonnie++ couldn't complete on nilfs2, only the generic tests
and tiobench were run. As nilfs2, ufs, zfs aren't supporting xattr, dbench
could not be run on these filesystems.
Short summary, AFAICT:
- btrfs, ext4 are the overall winners
- xfs to, but creating/deleting many files was *very* slow
- if you need only fast but no cool features or journaling, ext2
is still a good choice :)
Thanks,
Christian.
--
BOFH excuse #84:
Someone is standing on the ethernet cable, causing a kink in the cable
--
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