[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200705030651.40728.a1426z@gawab.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 06:51:40 +0300
From: Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ext3 vs NTFS performance
David Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 01:43:18PM -0700, Cabot, Mason B wrote:
> > 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?
It's a Samba problem. Samba doesn't do async writes, which v3.0 should have
fixed. Did you try that?
> As I commented on IRC to Val Henson - the XFS performance indicates
> that it is not a VFS or Samba problem.
XFS somewhat hides the Samba problem, by efficiently syncing to disk.
Thanks!
--
Al
-
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