Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751184AbbD3MHa (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:07:30 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52]:35268 "EHLO mail-wg0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750724AbbD3MHY (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:07:24 -0400 Message-ID: <1430395641.3180.94.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: xfs: does mkfs.xfs require fancy switches to get decent performance? (was Tux3 Report: How fast can we fsync?) From: Mike Galbraith To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Dave Chinner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tux3@tux3.org, "Theodore Ts'o" , OGAWA Hirofumi Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 14:07:21 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <8f886f13-6550-4322-95be-93244ae61045@phunq.net> <1430274071.3363.4.camel@gmail.com> <1906f271-aa23-404b-9776-a4e2bce0c6aa@phunq.net> <1430289213.3693.3.camel@gmail.com> <1430325763.19371.41.camel@gmail.com> <1430334326.7360.25.camel@gmail.com> <20150430002008.GY15810@dastard> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 641 Lines: 16 On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 04:14 -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote: > Lovely sounding argument, but it is wrong because Tux3 still beats XFS > even with seek time factored out of the equation. Hm. Do you have big-storage comparison numbers to back that? I'm no storage guy (waiting for holographic crystal arrays to obsolete all this crap;), but Dave's big-storage guy words made sense to me. -Mike -- 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/