Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933675AbXEPSNn (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2007 14:13:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759753AbXEPSNg (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2007 14:13:36 -0400 Received: from mailer.gwdg.de ([134.76.10.26]:52786 "EHLO mailer.gwdg.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756332AbXEPSNf (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2007 14:13:35 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 20:12:09 +0200 (MEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: Chris Mason cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: filesystem benchmarking fun In-Reply-To: <20070516144205.GV26766@think.oraclecorp.com> Message-ID: References: <20070516144205.GV26766@think.oraclecorp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Report: Content analysis: 0.0 points, 6.0 required _SUMMARY_ Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 975 Lines: 32 On May 16 2007 10:42, Chris Mason wrote: > >For example, I'll pick on xfs for a minute. compilebench shows the >default FS you get from mkfs.xfs is pretty slow for untarring a bunch of >kernel trees. I suppose you used 'nobarrier'? [ http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/5/19/33 ] >Dave Chinner gave me some mount options that make it >dramatically better, and `mkfs.xfs -l version=2` is also said to make it better >but it still writes at 10MB/s on a sata drive that >can do 80MB/s. Ext3 is better, but still only 20MB/s. > >Both are presumably picking a reasonable file and directory layout. >Still, our writeback algorithms are clearly not optimized for this kind >of workload. Should we fix it? Also try with tmpfs. Jan -- - 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/