| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 04:21:03 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com> To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com> cc: tytso@....edu, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alan Piszcz <ap@...arrain.com> Subject: Re: EXT4 is ~2X as slow as XFS (593MB/s vs 304MB/s) for writes? On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On 2010-02-28, at 07:55, Justin Piszcz wrote: >> === CREATE RAID-0 WITH 11 DISKS > > > Have you tried testing with "nice" numbers of disks in your RAID set (e.g. 8 > disks for RAID-0, 9 for RAID-5, 10 for RAID-6)? The mballoc code is really > much better tuned for power-of-two sized allocations. Hi, Yes, the second system (RAID-5) has 8 disks and it shows the same performance problems with ext4 and not XFS (as shown from previous e-mail), where XFS usually got 500-600MiB/s for writes. http://groups.google.com/group/linux.kernel/browse_thread/thread/e7b189bcaa2c1cb4/ad6c2a54b678cf5f?show_docid=ad6c2a54b678cf5f&pli=1 For the RAID-5 (from earlier testing): <- This one has 8 disks. -o data=writeback,nobarrier: 10737418240 bytes (11 GB) copied, 48.7335 s, 220 MB/s -o data=writeback,nobarrier,nodelalloc: 10737418240 bytes (11 GB) copied, 30.5425 s, 352 MB/s An increase of 132MiB/s. Justin. -- 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