[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100803231219.GH9453@thunk.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 19:12:19 -0400
From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>,
ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Wei Yongjun <yjwei@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: Any qualms about reverting 3d0518f4, ext4: New rec_len
encoding for very large blocksizes ?
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 05:49:22PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
> As far as I know, reverting it won't break 64kb dir blocks...?
I seem to recall there was some confusion about what was the correct
way of recording a rec_len of 64k --- 0 or 65535. So after reverting
the patch, we need to make sure we didn't end up breaking
compatibility with (a) existing file systems and (b) what older
versions of mke2fs may have generated.
> >> (this does 200 iterations) and got this for the file creations:
> >>
> >> ext4 stock: Average = 21206.8 files/s
> >> ext4 patched: Average = 22822.1 files/s
> >>
> >> This is a 7.6% improvement...
Wow. I assume that was because actually ending up burning enough CPU
time that it slowed bonnie's performance? I'm not sure how how
realistic is a benchmark that is simply creating vast numbers of small
files in a tight loop, but certainly on non-Itanium systems where the
page size is nowhere near 64k, it's arguably pointless. (Can you even
configure an Itanic to have to have a page size > 64k?)
So one way of dealing wih this is making it an inline, and then
#ifdef'ing out the more complex code if the page size is < 64k....
- Ted
--
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