On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 7:50 PM, Rekrutacja119 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > running postmark with numbers set to 20 000, transactions to 10 000 and > subdirectories to 20 000 i have following results with btrfs: > 24 seconds total > 11 seconds of transactions (909 per second) > Data: > 26.48 megabytes read (1.10 megabytes per second) > 136.18 megabytes written (5.67 megabytes per second) > > same for xfs is: > Time: > 70 seconds total > 52 seconds of transactions (192 per second) > Data: > 26.48 megabytes read (387.33 kilobytes per second) > 136.18 megabytes written (1.95 megabytes per second) > > it looks MUCH worse with more realistic setup, of 100 000 subdirs, 100 000 > files and 20 000 transactions. xfs slowed to 65KB/s !! on 4 drive RAID5 (new > drives, just bought, seagete 500GB ones) > btrfs was stable > > ext3 tests not possible because it would take like a day. (it is creating > subdirs very very slow) > ext4 is the same as ext3 > reiserfs is comparable speed to xfs > reiser4 is comparable speed to btrfs > > i only tested with postmark, as this is going to be users file array, with > files up to 3MB, and mostly in 5-50KB range > so no need to test how many MB/s it can copy with large files
Am I right to assume that your issue is the creation speed and not accessing the created 100.000 entries? I have to admit that I didn't look at what postmark effectively measures. > also - how can i turn on dir_index on xfs? i think it's mkfs.ext3 option > (and it is default on in /etc/mke2fs.conf) > AFAIK xfs like ReiserFS uses a B+ tree. _______________________________________________ Btrfs-devel mailing list [email protected] http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/btrfs-devel
