Re: [CentOS] ext4 on 5.3
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Jerry Geis ge...@pagestation.com wrote: grabbed my DVD and did an install. When partitioning the disk I did not see a selection for ext4. Is this enabled after the fact some how? Yes. Since it's a preview release, it's not available as an install target. -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 on 5.3
Jerry Geis wrote: grabbed my DVD and did an install. When partitioning the disk I did not see a selection for ext4. Is this enabled after the fact some how? You might have to give 'ext4' on the installer boot command line to enable ext4 Anaconda fsset.py has the code: # this is tech preview at present... if flags.cmdline.has_key(ext4): self.supported = -1 else: self.supported = 0 which is the same way it works with other non-supported file systems James Pearson ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009, Florin Andrei wrote: Stephen John Smoogen wrote: I make it a habit of eating my own words if I screw up. If the results seen on Ubuntu by one test hold up, it might have a large increase in large writes (but nothing in large reads). http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=ubuntu_ext4num=1 Right, so - Ext4 faster than Ext2? Not surprising. The on-disk format has changed. There's less fragmentation. There are all sorts of clever things included in the new FS. So, yes, it does more work with the disk, but in a much more intelligent way. Fragmentation is good for SSD's. You get better performance on random I/O than sequential I/O. -- -- dag wieers, d...@centos.org, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
On Friday 23 January 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Jerry Geis ge...@pagestation.com wrote: Hi guys - I'm really looking forward to 5.3 for the potential of ext4. I am moving/copying image files lately 8G file and it is slow. I am hoping that ext4 really speeds that up. I don't think it will speed things up much. 8GB files are mostly hardware throughput and ext3/4 will actually be slower because the journalling etc are to make it more robust but at a speed cost. You would probably see better speed by going to ext2. I make it a habit of eating my own words if I screw up. If the results seen on Ubuntu by one test hold up, it might have a large increase in large writes In my experience write performance for different filesystems is very dependant on the type of hardware. I have raid controllers where the difference between Ext3 and XFS is ~20% and I have those where it is 120%... (but nothing in large reads). Read (single thread seq.) is often limited by having a too low read ahead setting. blockdev --setra 8192 can often push it up to bare metal speed for both Ext3 and XFS. It's important to note that this may not be very optimal for your typical I/O mix (non single thread, non seq.). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Stephen John Smoogen wrote: I make it a habit of eating my own words if I screw up. If the results seen on Ubuntu by one test hold up, it might have a large increase in large writes (but nothing in large reads). http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=ubuntu_ext4num=1 Right, so - Ext4 faster than Ext2? Not surprising. The on-disk format has changed. There's less fragmentation. There are all sorts of clever things included in the new FS. So, yes, it does more work with the disk, but in a much more intelligent way. I like the stability of Ext3, but in terms of speed it's not the sharpest lightbulb in the toolshed. And after many years of using Linux, I'm not even buying the myth that Linux doesn't need a FS defragmenter. That's just not true. It does get fragmented, and due to that it does get slower. Ext4 is a welcome improvement. The upcoming btrfs perhaps even more so. -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009, Florin Andrei wrote: I like the stability of Ext3, but in terms of speed it's not the sharpest lightbulb in the toolshed. ROTFL: sharpest lightbulb in the toolshed. -- Paul the only sharp lightbulb is a broken one Heinlein ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Quoting Florin Andrei flo...@andrei.myip.org: I like the stability of Ext3, but in terms of speed it's not the sharpest lightbulb in the toolshed. Isn't that supposed to be not the fastest lawnmower in the toolshed ? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
on 1-23-2009 1:19 PM Ashley M. Kirchner spake the following: Quoting Florin Andrei flo...@andrei.myip.org: I like the stability of Ext3, but in terms of speed it's not the sharpest lightbulb in the toolshed. Isn't that supposed to be not the fastest lawnmower in the toolshed ? Or the sharpest crayon in the box. Sounds like a Biff'ism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biff_Tannen -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Scott Silva wrote: on 1-23-2009 1:19 PM Ashley M. Kirchner spake the following: Quoting Florin Andrei flo...@andrei.myip.org: I like the stability of Ext3, but in terms of speed it's not the sharpest lightbulb in the toolshed. Isn't that supposed to be not the fastest lawnmower in the toolshed ? Or the sharpest crayon in the box. Sounds like a Biff'ism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biff_Tannen Well, fastest knife in the chandelier didn't sound so good, so... -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Peter Kjellstrom wrote: I disagree. On most raid-controllers we use XFS has a significant advantage over Ext3 when it comes to large sequential writes. Ext3 gets nowhere near the bare metal performance. So, in short, I think it will be interesting to see how Ext4 performs for this. Exactly. There are differences between file systems even when using very large files sequentially. I did benchmarks on various controllers and my experience was the same: the file system does matter. -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Jerry Geis ge...@pagestation.com wrote: Hi guys - I'm really looking forward to 5.3 for the potential of ext4. I am moving/copying image files lately 8G file and it is slow. I am hoping that ext4 really speeds that up. I don't think it will speed things up much. 8GB files are mostly hardware throughput and ext3/4 will actually be slower because the journalling etc are to make it more robust but at a speed cost. You would probably see better speed by going to ext2. I make it a habit of eating my own words if I screw up. If the results seen on Ubuntu by one test hold up, it might have a large increase in large writes (but nothing in large reads). http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=ubuntu_ext4num=1 -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. The Merchant of Venice ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Real World Benchmarks Of The EXT4 File-System http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=ext4_benchmarksnum=1 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Stephen John Smoogen wrote: Hi guys - I'm really looking forward to 5.3 for the potential of ext4. I am moving/copying image files lately 8G file and it is slow. I am hoping that ext4 really speeds that up. I don't think it will speed things up much. 8GB files are mostly hardware throughput and ext3/4 will actually be slower because the journalling etc are to make it more robust but at a speed cost. You would probably see better speed by going to ext2. I make it a habit of eating my own words if I screw up. If the results seen on Ubuntu by one test hold up, it might have a large increase in large writes (but nothing in large reads). http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=ubuntu_ext4num=1 Has anything fixed fsync so it works as intended on a single file without waiting for the whole filesystem metatdata to be written? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Hi; Do you test in other file system? Like xfs or jfs? You can use the time command to get the exate time: # time cp /pathsource/file8g /pathdest/ Post here yours results. []s Renato de Oliveira Diogo Bacharel em Ciência da Computação UNESP - Bauru LPIC1 - Linux Professional Institute Certification - Nível 1 renato.di...@gmail.com renato.di...@yahoo.com.br On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 02:11, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.comwrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Jerry Geis ge...@pagestation.com wrote: Hi guys - I'm really looking forward to 5.3 for the potential of ext4. I am moving/copying image files lately 8G file and it is slow. I am hoping that ext4 really speeds that up. I don't think it will speed things up much. 8GB files are mostly hardware throughput and ext3/4 will actually be slower because the journalling etc are to make it more robust but at a speed cost. You would probably see better speed by going to ext2. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. The Merchant of Venice ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Renato de Oliveira Diogo wrote: Hi; Do you test in other file system? Like xfs or jfs? You can use the time command to get the exate time: # time cp /pathsource/file8g /pathdest/ Post here yours results. I like to use rsync with --progress so it shows realtime updates on the status of the copy when testing performance like that. But I agree that the file system likely will not have a noticeable overhead with regards to copy performance on single 8GB files, now 10,000 files that take up 8GB of space I can see a file system having a performance impact. nate ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
On Wednesday 21 January 2009, nate wrote: Renato de Oliveira Diogo wrote: Hi; Do you test in other file system? Like xfs or jfs? You can use the time command to get the exate time: # time cp /pathsource/file8g /pathdest/ Post here yours results. I like to use rsync with --progress so it shows realtime updates on the status of the copy when testing performance like that. But I agree that the file system likely will not have a noticeable overhead with regards to copy performance on single 8GB files, now 10,000 files that take up 8GB of space I can see a file system having a performance impact. I disagree. On most raid-controllers we use XFS has a significant advantage over Ext3 when it comes to large sequential writes. Ext3 gets nowhere near the bare metal performance. So, in short, I think it will be interesting to see how Ext4 performs for this. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
Hi guys - I'm really looking forward to 5.3 for the potential of ext4. I am moving/copying image files lately 8G file and it is slow. I am hoping that ext4 really speeds that up. My question is: will we be able to boot ext4 file systems? Will the boot partition still be ext3 and then have to mount the ext4 filesystem? I did not see mention of it in the release notes. Thanks, Jerry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 20:33 -0500, Jerry Geis wrote: Will the boot partition still be ext3 and then have to mount the ext4 filesystem? Yes, but you wouldn't gain much by making /boot ext4. -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams ivazquez...@gmail.com PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in 5.3
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Jerry Geis ge...@pagestation.com wrote: Hi guys - I'm really looking forward to 5.3 for the potential of ext4. I am moving/copying image files lately 8G file and it is slow. I am hoping that ext4 really speeds that up. I don't think it will speed things up much. 8GB files are mostly hardware throughput and ext3/4 will actually be slower because the journalling etc are to make it more robust but at a speed cost. You would probably see better speed by going to ext2. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. The Merchant of Venice ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
