[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070502154637.GC77450368@melbourne.sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 01:46:37 +1000
From: David Chinner <dgc@....com>
To: Gerhard Mack <gmack@...erfire.net>
Cc: "Cabot, Mason B" <mason.b.cabot@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ext3 vs NTFS performance
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 11:54:04PM -0400, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> On Tue, 1 May 2007, Cabot, Mason B wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I've been testing the NAS performance of ext3/Openfiler 2.2 against
> > NTFS/WinXP and have found that NTFS significantly outperforms ext3 for
> > video workloads. The Windows CIFS client will attempt a poor-man's
> > pre-allocation of the file on the server by sending 1-byte writes at
> > 128K-byte strides, breaking block allocation on ext3 and leading to
> > fragmentation and poor performance. This will happen for many
> > applications (including iTunes) as the CIFS client issues these
> > pre-allocates under the application layer.
> >
> > I've posted a brief paper on Intel's OSS website
> > (http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1259.htm). Please give
> > it a read and let me know what you think. In particular, I'd like to
> > arrive at the right place to fix this problem: is it in the filesystem,
> > VFS, or Samba?
> >
> > thanks,
> > Mason
> >
>
> Just out of curiosity do other filesystems(reiser, xfs) take the same
> performance hit?
XFS was also tested - it is as fast as the Windows NTFS based
server.....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists