2.6.24 kernel, also i see other people start to notice xfs problems too: http://www.t2-project.org/zine/1/ ( i also saw other benchmarks)
it is second day that only thing i do is test different fs ( i need to choose which one to use quickly ), and when it comes to small files, reading them , listing large number of subdirs, xfs seems to have TRAGIC performance. i mean it can be like 100 times slower in some cases. ( you can see performance results of the other person in a link i pasted ) i will try 2.6.25-rc but i doubt it will bring back xfs to normal performance state. something is really wrong with xfs, and i just see it on my server for some time. how it is possible that my raid 0 made from 3 disks was slow, most processes were in 'wait' state (top showing a lot of processes waiting for hdd access) under heavy load, but... when i change from this array of 3 disk in raid 0 on xfs, to just ONE disk (should be 3 times slower) but on reiser4 with compression, everything is working like it was! i mean, reiser4 on hardware 3 times slower was doing the same in real life as xfs on better hardware. that's on server with more than 100 hits per second. reiser4 is working third week without problems (but it is just a temporary solution, i had my own problems with reiser4 and i don't trust it enough to use it longtime) anyways, i hoped btrfs will help me with this, but if there are going to be on-disk changes without backward compatbility, i think i will pass. 2008/3/8, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Sat, Mar 08, 2008 at 07:50:02PM +0100, Rekrutacja119 wrote: > > same for xfs is: > > which version of xfs did you test? 2.6.25-rc has some changes in this > area that should improve metadata intensive workloads dramatically. > >
_______________________________________________ Btrfs-devel mailing list [email protected] http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/btrfs-devel
