On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferro...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2015-08-14 14:31, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Eduardo Bach <hellb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> With btrfs the result approaches 3.5GB/s. When using mdadm+xfs the >>> result reaches 6gb/s, which is the expected value when compared with >>> parallel dd made on discs. >> >> >> mdadm with what chunk (strip) size? The default for mdadm is 512KiB. >> On Btrfs it's fixed at 64KiB. While testing with 64KiB chunk with XFS >> on md RAID might improve its performance relative to Btrfs, at least >> it's a more apples to apples comparison. >> > I have a feeling that XFS will still win this. It is one of the slower > filesystems for Linux, but it still beats BTRFS senseless when it comes to > performance as of right now.
Yeah I was suggesting with a 64KiB chunk the XFS case might get even faster. -- Chris Murphy -- 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
