Johan Corveleyn said the following, on 22-04-14, 9:30 AM:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Florian Ludwig
<vierzigundz...@gmail.com> wrote:
From your numbers I deduce that the performance degradation can be
attributed partly to NTFS vs. ext4, and partly to Windows7 vs. Linux:
* NTFS vs. ext4: roughly a factor 3 slower.
* Windows 7 vs. Linux: roughly a factor 2.5 slower.
You assume that the file operation performance of Windows on NTFS and Linux
on NTFS is the same - which I am sure it is not. First of all the NTFS
driver on Linux is FUSE-based so it runs in userspace and therefor slower
than kernel based drivers such as ext4. Also ext4 is one of the most used
file system on Linux so I expect its code to be much more optimized.
Okay, I handwaved a bit too much. Maybe we should just take the
Linux+NTFS numbers with a grain of salt then, and mainly focus on
Linux+ext4 vs. Windows+NTFS. The fact remains that there are two
variables changing. But maybe it's not a big issue for this
comparison, and it's almost unavoidable.
And nfs as well, please (sorry for hijacking the thread).
Perfomance on nfs is just terrible (for all svn client versions).
Take any linux box, checkout to local fs and checkout to nfs vol: you
gonna be amazed.
The nfs thing should be a big deal, since build servers (jenkins and
other such) are severely impacted by this design.
--Roman
