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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 09:00:38 -0500 From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com> To: Jacek Luczak <difrost.kernel@...il.com> Cc: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: getdents - ext4 vs btrfs performance On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 11:05:56AM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote: > > I've took both on tests. The subject is acp and spd_readdir used with > tar, all on ext4: > 1) acp: http://91.234.146.107/~difrost/seekwatcher/acp_ext4.png > 2) spd_readdir: http://91.234.146.107/~difrost/seekwatcher/tar_ext4_readir.png > 3) both: http://91.234.146.107/~difrost/seekwatcher/acp_vs_spd_ext4.png > > The acp looks much better than spd_readdir but directory copy with > spd_readdir decreased to 52m 39sec (30 min less). Do you have stats on how big these files are, and how fragmented they are? For acp and spd to give us this, I think something has gone wrong at writeback time (creating individual fragmented files). -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