From: Jean-Pierre Dion Subject: Re: Ext4 benchmarks Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 16:56:26 +0200 Message-ID: <4611199A.3050506@bull.net> References: <45FFFBAA.6080404@bull.net> <4600A1BD.80700@us.ibm.com> <460A3010.6080201@bull.net> <460A79C2.6030406@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: jrs@us.ibm.com Return-path: Received: from ecfrec.frec.bull.fr ([129.183.4.8]:47436 "EHLO ecfrec.frec.bull.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965550AbXDBO4I (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 10:56:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <460A79C2.6030406@us.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Hi Jose, I have to check with the team here. Will tell you. Thanks. jean-pierre Jose R. Santos wrote: > Jean-Pierre Dion wrote: >> Hi Jose, >> >> thank you for the feedback. >> >> We took your remarks into account and we are doing some perfs with >> iozone (close to desktop activity, mono-thread) and ffsb (allows to >> run benchs >> in a multi-thread activity like a server does, different blocks >> sizes...). >> >> We compare ext3 and ext4 (with extents, w/ and w/o del alloc...)... >> >> We will publish the results on bullopensource.org >> > > Hi Jean-Pierre, > > While it may be to late for the purposes of your OLS paper, one thing > that doesn't seem to be getting much attention is the performance of a > file system while doing many meta-data operations or throughput > testing during heavy journal log activity. I believe that IOzone is > very limited in testing this and FFSB isn't much better at it either. > Eventually, I plan to add support in FFSB to create workload profile > were one can select a weight balance of these types of operations. > > Is this something that you are already doing for this round of testing? > > -JRS >