[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120301141823.GV5054@shiny>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 09:18:23 -0500
From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
To: Jacek Luczak <difrost.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
lczerner@...hat.com
Subject: Re: getdents - ext4 vs btrfs performance
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 03:03:53PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
> 2012/3/1 Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>:
> > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Jacek Luczak <difrost.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> While I was about to grab acp I've noticed seekwatcher with made my day :)
> >>
> >> seekwatcher run of tar cf to eliminate writes (all done on 3.2.7):
> >> 1) btrfs: http://dozzie.jarowit.net/~dozzie/luczajac/tar_btrfs.png
> >> 2) ext4: http://dozzie.jarowit.net/~dozzie/luczajac/tar_ext4.png
> >> 3) both merged: http://dozzie.jarowit.net/~dozzie/luczajac/tar_btrfs_ext4.png
Whoa, seekwatcher makes it pretty clear.
> >>
> >> I will send acp results soon.
> >>
> > Would you please take reiserfs into account?
>
> As of now not (lack of time) but I'm pretty close to consider XFS in
> the game. Whenever I will have more time and there won't be a pressure
> on giving host back to production I will redo same tests for reiserfs.
>
> Now I'm focused on the userspace sorting results.
reiserfs should have results very similar to ext4. The directory
hashing used by reiserfs is going to result in a very random read
pattern.
XFS will probably beat btrfs in this test. Their directory indexes
reflect on disk layout very well.
-chris
--
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