[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004112014520.18009@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 20:16:09 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
cc: Ben Gamari <bgamari.foss@...il.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, tytso@....edu,
npiggin@...e.de, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Ruald Andreae <ruald.a@...il.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Olly Betts <olly@...vex.com>,
martin f krafft <madduck@...duck.net>
Subject: Re: Poor interactive performance with I/O loads with fsync()ing
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 04/09/2010 05:56 PM, Ben Gamari wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 00:08:58 +0200, Andi Kleen<andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Ben Gamari<bgamari.foss@...il.com> writes:
> > > ext4/XFS/JFS/btrfs should be better in this regard
> > >
> > >
> > I am using btrfs, so yes, I was expecting things to be better.
> > Unfortunately,
> > the improvement seems to be non-existent under high IO/fsync load.
> >
> >
>
> btrfs is known to perform poorly under fsync.
XFS does not do much better. Just moved my VM images back to ext for
that reason.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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