Phoronix periodically runs benchmarks on filesystems, and one thing I
have noticed is that btrfs always does terribly on their fio "Intel
IOMeter fileserver access pattern" benchmark:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_310_10fs&num=2
Here, btrfs is more than 6 times slower t
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:13:04AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> Phoronix periodically runs benchmarks on filesystems, and one thing I
> have noticed is that btrfs always does terribly on their fio "Intel
> IOMeter fileserver access pattern" benchmark:
>
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=art
> What is going on here? Why is btrfs doing so poorly?
Funny thing, I was thinking exactly the same when reading the article ;)
Regards
--
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://vg
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:13:04AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> Phoronix periodically runs benchmarks on filesystems, and one thing I
> have noticed is that btrfs always does terribly on their fio "Intel
> IOMeter fileserver access pattern" benchmark:
>
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=art
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:13:04AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
>> Phoronix periodically runs benchmarks on filesystems, and one thing I
>> have noticed is that btrfs always does terribly on their fio "Intel
>> IOMeter fileserver access pattern"
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 01:23:22PM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:13:04AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> >> Phoronix periodically runs benchmarks on filesystems, and one thing I
> >> have noticed is that btrfs always
On Aug 8, 2013, at 2:23 PM, John Williams wrote:
>
> So I guess the reason that ZFS does well with that workload is that
> ZFS is using smaller blocks, maybe just 512B ?
Likely. It uses a variable block size.
> I wonder how common these type of non-4K aligned workloads are.
> Apparently, peop
> I also don't know if any common use fs has an optimization whereby
> just the modified sector(s) is overwritten, rather than all sectors
> making up the file system block being modified.
Most of them do. The generic direct io path allows sector sized dio.
The very first bit of do_blockdev_direc
Josef Bacik schrieb:
>> So I guess the reason that ZFS does well with that workload is that
>> ZFS is using smaller blocks, maybe just 512B ?
>
> Yeah I'm not sure what ZFS does, but if you are writing over a block and
> the size/offset isn't aligned then you'd see similar issues with ZFS since
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 11:35:33PM +0200, Kai Krakow wrote:
> Josef Bacik schrieb:
>
> >> So I guess the reason that ZFS does well with that workload is that
> >> ZFS is using smaller blocks, maybe just 512B ?
> >
> > Yeah I'm not sure what ZFS does, but if you are writing over a block and
> > t
10 matches
Mail list logo