xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: observed significant performance improvement using "delaylog" in

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: observed significant performance improvement using "delaylog" in
From: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:35:44 +0200
Cc: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4C6516CA.2010602@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: it-management http://it-management.at
References: <201008121346.30760.eye.of.the.8eholder@xxxxxxxxx> <i41q43$6td$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4C6516CA.2010602@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: KMail/1.12.4 (Linux/2.6.35-zmi; KDE/4.3.5; x86_64; ; )
On Freitag, 13. August 2010 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Some benchmark results maybe worth a look:
> http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/2.6.35-rc5/2.6.35-rc5/
 
Thanks - it would have been great to see xfs with delaylog in that 
comparison, but the graphs are very very nice.

XFS seems performing better the more threads there are, just in "large 
file random reads" it's the slowest - why this?

A test with "lots of small files in a dir" would be great, something 
like the squid cachedir or just a single dir with >5.000 files in it.

-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>