linux-ext4 - Re: [patch/rft] jbd2: tag journal writes as metadata I/O

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]

Date:	Mon, 05 Apr 2010 16:34:36 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	tytso@....edu
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, esandeen@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch/rft] jbd2: tag journal writes as metadata I/O

tytso@....edu writes:

> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 02:36:07PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> >
>> > What benchmark were you using to test small file writes?  This looks
>> > good to me as well, but we might want to do some extra benchmarking
>> > just to be sure we're not accidentally introducing a performance
>> > regression.
>> 
>> iozone showed regressions for write and re-write in runs that include
>> fsync timings for small files (<8MB).  Here's the command line used for
>> testing:
>> 
>> iozone -az -n 4k -g 2048m -y 1k -q 1m -e
>
> iozone is showing performance regressions or performance improvements?
> I thought the point of this patch was to improve iozone benchmarks?

Sorry, Ted, what I meant to say was that iozone showed differences
between deadline and cfq, where cfq's performance was much worse than
deadline's.

Thanks!
Jeff
--
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