Thanks for your suggestion; I had somehow missed there's a debug option.
Attached is the log for reading with lzo compression. Please note that I
cancelled the read operation at some point.
Hope that helps ...
** Attachment added: debug_read.txt
On Friday 21 May 2010 20:42:39 andreas wrote:
Thanks for your suggestion; I had somehow missed there's a debug option.
Attached is the log for reading with lzo compression. Please note that I
cancelled the read operation at some point.
Hope that helps ...
Not much help from the logs.
The
okay, here's the vmstat output. i dont't understand what it tries to
tell me ...
probably i'll just go for zlib then, but would rather have the
supposedly higher performance of lzo ...
anyways, thanks for your help!
** Attachment added: vmstat.txt
Here's some specs:
Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid AMD64
Kernel 2.6.32-22-generic
libfuse 2.8.1-1
Fusecompress 2.6-2
Filesystem: XFS
4G RAM, 8G swap
CPU Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz
dmesg doesn't show anything. i'll do some more testing and post results
later ...
--
fusecompress eats up
okay, did some more testing.
I created 3 test ascii files test_{1,2,3}.txt, having sizes of approx.
3M, 28M, 56M.
Then I ran this script:
#!/bin/sh
for ALG in zlib bzip2 lzo
do
echo $ALG
for TEST in test_*.txt
do
ls -l -h $TEST
fusecompress -o fc_c:$ALG
On Thursday 20 May 2010 14:09:20 you wrote:
Here's some specs:
Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid AMD64
Kernel 2.6.32-22-generic
libfuse 2.8.1-1
Fusecompress 2.6-2
Filesystem: XFS
4G RAM, 8G swap
CPU Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz
dmesg doesn't show anything. i'll do some more
The compressed folder lies on a xfs filesystem on a software raid-0.
--
fusecompress eats up memory when reading a file
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/582943
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
some more info:
in general, the read performance seems to be extremely low.
copying a 3.2M ASCII file from the compressed folder to my home
directory takes 1.37s, whereas copying it within my homedirectory only
takes .006s.
is this to be expected? I would have expected a much higher performance
On Wednesday 19 May 2010 23:07:48 you wrote:
copying a 3.2M ASCII file from the compressed folder to my home
directory takes 1.37s, whereas copying it within my homedirectory only
takes .006s.
is this to be expected? I would have expected a much higher performance
Certainly not. Can you
