Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269600AbUICKNB (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2004 06:13:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269670AbUICKJC (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2004 06:09:02 -0400 Received: from alias.nmd.msu.ru ([193.232.127.67]:56372 "EHLO alias.nmd.msu.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269623AbUICKIP (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2004 06:08:15 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 14:08:12 +0400 From: Alexander Lyamin To: bzolnier@milosz.na.pl Cc: Justin Piszcz , zam@namesys.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: A few filesystem benchmarks w/ReiserFS4 vs Other Filesystems Message-ID: <20040903100812.GA32387@alias> Reply-To: flx@msu.ru Mail-Followup-To: flx@msu.ru, bzolnier@milosz.na.pl, Justin Piszcz , zam@namesys.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200408271745.41722.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200408271745.41722.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.5-7.104-smp X-Fnord: +++ath X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard; BGColor=black; TextColor=black X-Message-Flag: Message text blocked: ADULT LANGUAGE/SITUATIONS User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1537 Lines: 36 Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 05:45:41PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > Hi, > > Execute rm -rf linux-2.6.8.1 on each file system. > > # -------------------------------------------------------------------- # > > ext2 | 10.26 sec @ 22% cpu > > ext3 | 10.02 sec @ 25% cpu > > jfs | 26.67 sec @ 27% cpu > > rs3 | 03.22 sec @ 74% cpu > > rs4 | 25.58 sec @ 50% cpu <- What happened to reiserfs4 here? > > xfs | 12.51 sec @ 47% cpu > > # -------------------------------------------------------------------- # > > Create a 500MB file with dd to each filesystem with 1MB blocks. > > # -------------------------------------------------------------------- # > > ext2 | 15.72 sec @ 26% cpu > > ext3 | 17.04 sec @ 31% cpu > > jfs | 29.57 sec @ 25% cpu > > rs3 | 15.21 sec @ 27% cpu > > rs4 | 23.96 sec @ 23% cpu <- What happened to reiserfs4 here? > > xfs | 19.07 sec @ 29% cpu Your answers somewhere in HCH's "silent semantics" thread. Basically reiserfs team aware that they do suck at file DELETES and OVERWRITES. There seem to be a way to rectify this perfomance issues in future (dynamic repacker?). Altough i was somewhat surprised with this dd file benchmark... probably Alexander Zarochentsev knows the answer. -- "the liberation loophole will make it clear.." lex lyamin - 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/