DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=F5XjkvMMdLbNWO1p2GYnccxMVtR9TjduavNqMMYlt0BrBFZIpqm1YeoCdJpf8H8ytyw7KDvDQid2e/NFPhGOf3C50HewfGzQJM3yHhlXB2YPdLN2tywkFs3dzE7ez9kU/GK29PdaPDY6G0YQNQRPu2/sSk0UAfeizTSdnDzlV2w=
Message-ID: <ceccffee0610230832l4eb76b0dvd1c4c275ae462d3d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 17:32:21 +0200
From: "Linux Portal" <linportal@gmail.com>
To: "Theodore Tso" <tytso@mit.edu>, "Linux Portal" <linportal@gmail.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: First benchmarks of the ext4 file system
In-Reply-To: <20061023020731.GA486@thunk.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <ceccffee0610211657u66b758b7r78fbf1c75f5dea67@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20061023020731.GA486@thunk.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1859
Lines: 40

On 10/23/06, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 01:57:36AM +0200, Linux Portal wrote:
> > ext4 is 20 percent faster writer than ext3 or reiser4, probably thanks
> > to extents and delayed allocation. On other tests it is either
> > slightly faster or slightly slower. reiser4 comes as a nice surprise,
> > winning few benchmarks. Both are very stable, no errors during
> > testing.
>
> As Andrew has already pointed out, we don't have delayed allocation
> merged in into the -mm tree yet.

OK.

> If you have the
> time/energy/interest, a very useful thing that would very much help
> the filesystem developers of all filesystems to do would be to
> automated your tesitng enough that you can do these tests on a
> frequent basis, both to track regressions caused by changes in other
> parts of the kernel, as well we to see what happens as various bits of
> functionality get added to the filesystem.  This of course can become
> an arbitrarily a huge amount of work, as you add more filesystems and
> benchmarks, but it's the sort of thing which is incredibly useful
> especially if the hardware is held constant across a large number of
> filesystems, workloads/benchmarks, and kernel versions.
>

I agree completely. That was my original idea, to prepare some setup for
thorough testing, but I soon discovered that would really be a huge project,
because of so many parameters involved.

So, at this time, I just satisfied my curiosity ;) with few simple tests of the
early version of ext4. We'll see what the future brings (how much free
time, in the first place ;)).

Best regards,
-
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/