linux-ext4 - Re: du -s src is a lot slower on SSD than spinning disk in the same laptop

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:	Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:18:56 +0200
From:	Spelic <spelic@...ftmail.org>
To:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: du -s src is a lot slower on SSD than spinning disk in the same
 laptop

On 08/01/12 07:30, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> 2) Then I put a crucial 256 C300 SSD (the replacement for the one I 
> had that just died and killed all my data), and du took 0.3 seconds on 
> both my old and new thinkpads. 


What does FIO say on your Samsung 830 SSD, 4k random reads?
Last time I checked online benchmarks Samsung 830 had very good 4k 
random reads, but it's difficult to find online benchmarks for 
incompressible data (which fio rightly uses btw)

multithreded test:
vi fiotest_mt.fio
         [random-read]
         rw=randread
         numjobs=20
         thread
         iodepth=10
         group_reporting
         blocksize=4k
         size=512m
         directory=/mnt/<yourmountpoint>
         end_fsync=1
         runtime=10

and single threaded (more important here):
vi fiotest_st.fio
         [random-read]
         rw=randread
         numjobs=1
         thread
         iodepth=1
         group_reporting
         blocksize=4k
         size=4g
         directory=/mnt/<yourmountpoint>
         end_fsync=1
         runtime=10


--
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