Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932270Ab3GBI1W (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jul 2013 04:27:22 -0400 Received: from mysmtp1.stec-inc.com ([1.9.68.9]:56863 "HELO stec-inc.com.stec-inc.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753309Ab3GBI1T convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jul 2013 04:27:19 -0400 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1372753635-053ea947e82e8f80001-xx1T2L X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: osengineering@stec-inc.com From: OS Engineering To: Mike Snitzer CC: Amit Phansalkar , "thornber@redhat.com" , "dm-devel@redhat.com" , "Jens Axboe" , LKML , "linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org" , "Padmini Balasubramaniyan" , "koverstreet@google.com" Subject: RE: Performance Comparison among EnhanceIO, bcache and dm-cache. Thread-Topic: Performance Comparison among EnhanceIO, bcache and dm-cache. X-ASG-Orig-Subj: RE: Performance Comparison among EnhanceIO, bcache and dm-cache. Thread-Index: AQHOaKoi3ZDPNgozIE2Qnh8POgAh+JlRKGdg Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 08:25:17 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.20.20.131] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Barracuda-Connect: mycas03.stec-inc.ad[172.30.8.21] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1372753635 X-Barracuda-URL: http://myspam1.stec-inc.com:8000/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=9.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.2.135574 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1310 Lines: 24 >On Jun 11, 2013 11:06 AM, "OS Engineering" wrote: >> >> Hi Jens, >> >> In continuation with our previous communication, we have carried out performance comparison among EnhanceIO, bcache and dm-cache. >How reproducible are these results?? Any chance you could do 5-10 runs to get the avg and stddev?? May (or may not) prove interesting. Hi mike, We found that, in case of write through caches, the test results were consistent for all caching solution with EnhanceIO providing better throughput in comparison to bcache and dm-cache. However, under write-back mode, dm-cache showed a large standard deviation. The results for EnhanceIO and bcache were consistent with EnhanceIO providing higher throughput when compared to bcache. We have performed 5 runs for all our performance tests and observed their mean and standard deviations. The test results can be found at: https://gist.github.com/sanoj-stec/5858574 The test scripts can be found at: https://github.com/stec-inc/EnhanceIO/tree/master/performance_test Regards, Sanoj -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/