HI, Do you have any benchmarks against non-raid common workloads? Like say a desktop user? It would be great to compare against ext3, ext4, xfs etc.,
Thanks, On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 2:05 AM, Chris Mason<chris.ma...@oracle.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 04:10:41PM -0500, Steven Pratt wrote: >> > >> >Hi Steve, >> > >> >I think I'm going to start tuning something other than the >> >random-writes, there is definitely low hanging fruit in the large file >> >creates workload ;) Thanks again for posting all of these. >> Sure, no problem. >> >> >The history graph has 2.6.31-rc btrfs against 2.6.29-rc ext4. Have you >> >done more recent runs on ext4? >> > >> Yes, thanks for pointing that out, had so many issues I forgot to >> update the graphs for other file systems. Just pushed new graphs >> with data for 2.6.30-rc7 for all the other file systems. This was >> from your "newformat" branch from June 6th. > > I've been tuning the 128 thread large file streaming writes, and found > some easy optimizations. While I'm fixing up these patches, could you > please do a streaming O_DIRECT write test run for me? I think buffered > writeback in general has some problems right now on high end arrays. > > On my box 2.6.31-rc5 streaming buffered write with xfs only got at > 200MB/s (with the 128 thread ffsb workload). Buffered btrfs goes at > 175MB/s. > > O_DIRECT btrfs runs at 390MB/s, while XFS varies a bit between 330MB/s > and 250MB/s. > > I'm using a 1MB write blocksize. > > -chris > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
