Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks

2007-10-16 Thread Chris Mason
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 12:36 +1000, David Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 08:22:31PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > I'm stealing the cc list and reviving and old thread because I've > > finally got some numbers to go along with the Btrfs variable blocksize > >

Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks

2007-10-16 Thread Chris Mason
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 12:36 +1000, David Chinner wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 08:22:31PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: Hello everyone, I'm stealing the cc list and reviving and old thread because I've finally got some numbers to go along with the Btrfs variable blocksize feature. The

Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks

2007-10-15 Thread David Chinner
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 08:22:31PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm stealing the cc list and reviving and old thread because I've > finally got some numbers to go along with the Btrfs variable blocksize > feature. The basic idea is to create a read/write interface to > map a

Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks

2007-10-15 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Chris Mason wrote: > Dave reported that XFS saw much higher write throughput with large > blocksizes, but so far I'm seeing the most benefits during reads. Dave's tests were done with an early large blocksize patchset that had issues with readahead. More recent versions

More Large blocksize benchmarks

2007-10-15 Thread Chris Mason
Hello everyone, I'm stealing the cc list and reviving and old thread because I've finally got some numbers to go along with the Btrfs variable blocksize feature. The basic idea is to create a read/write interface to map a range of bytes on the address space, and use it in Btrfs for all metadata

More Large blocksize benchmarks

2007-10-15 Thread Chris Mason
Hello everyone, I'm stealing the cc list and reviving and old thread because I've finally got some numbers to go along with the Btrfs variable blocksize feature. The basic idea is to create a read/write interface to map a range of bytes on the address space, and use it in Btrfs for all metadata

Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks

2007-10-15 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Chris Mason wrote: Dave reported that XFS saw much higher write throughput with large blocksizes, but so far I'm seeing the most benefits during reads. Dave's tests were done with an early large blocksize patchset that had issues with readahead. More recent versions have

Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks

2007-10-15 Thread David Chinner
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 08:22:31PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: Hello everyone, I'm stealing the cc list and reviving and old thread because I've finally got some numbers to go along with the Btrfs variable blocksize feature. The basic idea is to create a read/write interface to map a range