| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <a769871e0909260727l65fd04a8ud49a9e0e0ec7d9a6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 16:27:46 +0200 From: wbrana@...il.com To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: EXT4 RAID read performance On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu> wrote: > You didn't say which version of the kernel you are using, which could > be important when asking these sorts of questions about potential > performance problems. > 2.6.31 > > Now, there are some workloads which compilebench might accurately > model --- for example, tar'ing up a directory. However, despite the > name of the benchmark, it doesn't accurately model a kernel compile. > You are right. I created simple benchmark which does real compilation of kernel with following results: reiser3 16925 msec: tar xf /usr/src/linux.tar 119173 msec: make -j4 all ext4 14296 msec: tar xf /usr/src/linux.tar 116692 msec: make -j4 all btrfs 13493 msec: tar xf /usr/src/linux.tar 116015 msec: make -j4 all MD RAID10-f2 with 256 kB chunk size was used in all cases. Source code: http://www.sendspace.com/file/fmikv7 It depends on Qt Core library. There are hard-coded paths. It can delete important data if it is started without customization !!! -- 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