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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C7D7BA5.6080607@noir.com>
Date:	Tue, 31 Aug 2010 15:01:09 -0700
From:	"K. Richard Pixley" <rich@...r.com>
To:	Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@...efedyk.com>
CC:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>,
	Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	hch@...radead.org, gg.mariotti@...il.com,
	"Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@...il.com>, mjt@....msk.ru,
	tytso@....edu
Subject: Re: BTRFS: Unbelievably slow with kvm/qemu

On 20100831 14:46, Mike Fedyk wrote:
 > There is little reason not to use duplicate metadata.  Only small
 > files (less than 2kb) get stored in the tree, so there should be no
 > worries about images being duplicated without data duplication set at
 > mkfs time.

My benchmarks show that for my kinds of data, btrfs is somewhat slower 
than ext4, (which is slightly slower than ext3 which is somewhat slower 
than ext2), when using the defaults, (ie, duplicate metadata).

It's a hair faster than ext2, (the fastest of the ext family), when 
using singleton metadata.  And ext2 isn't even crash resistant while 
btrfs has snapshots.

I'm using hardware raid for striping speed.  (Tried btrfs striping, it 
was close, but not as fast on my hardware).  I want speed, speed, speed. 
  My data is only vaguely important, (continuous builders), but speed is 
everything.

While the reason to use singleton metadata may be "little", it dominates 
my application.  If I were forced to use duplicate metadata then I'd 
still be arguing with my coworkers about whether the speed costs were 
worth it to buy snapshot functionality.  But the fact that btrfs is 
faster AND provides snapshots, (and less metadata overhead and bigger 
file systems and etc), makes for an easy sale.

Note that nilfs2 has similar performance, but somewhat different 
snapshot characteristics that aren't as useful in my current application.

--rich
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ