[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <493C3570.4040100@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2008 14:43:28 -0600
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Harald Arnesen <skogtun.harald@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ext4] Documentation patch
Theodore Tso wrote:
> Good points. OK, how about this?
>
> - When comparing performance with other filesystems, it's always
> important to try multiple workloads; very often a subtle change in a
> workload parameter can completely change the ranking of which
> filesystems do well compared to others. When comparing versus ext3,
> note that ext4 enables write barriers by default, while ext3 does
> not enable write barriers by default. So it is useful to use
> explicitly specify whether barriers are enabled or not when via the
> '-o barriers=[0|1]' mount option for both ext3 and ext4 filesystems
> for a fair comparison. When tuning ext3 for best benchmark numbers,
> it is often worthwhile to try changing the data journaling mode; '-o
> data=writeback,nobh' can be faster for some workloads. (Note
> however that running mounting with data=writeback can potentially
I'd say "running mounted with data=writeback...."
other than that it looks good to me :)
(sorta nitpicky but it probably won't be touched again for 5 years so
may as well get it right now) :)
-Eric
> leave stale data exposed in recently written files in case of an
> unclean shutdown, which could be a security exposure in some
> situations.) Configuring the filesystem with a large journal can
> also be helpful for metadata-intensive workloads.
>
> - Ted
--
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