From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: Raid FFSB Benchmark results for 2.6.35-rc5 Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 15:14:39 -0400 Message-ID: <20100806191439.GD24583@thunk.org> References: <1281121633.7357.26.camel@keith-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Keith Mannthey Return-path: Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:37937 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965032Ab0HFTOp (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2010 15:14:45 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1281121633.7357.26.camel@keith-laptop> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 12:07:13PM -0700, Keith Mannthey wrote: > This is a collection of benchmark runs with the FFSB test suite. The > results are comparable to other raid results on the boxacle server. > > The latest results can be found at: > http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/2.6.35-rc5/2.6.35-rc5/2.6.35-rc5.html > > I added XFS without barriers and EXT3 with barriers into the mix since > my last data set. Thanks, it's good to know there haven't been any major regression on the ext4 side. If you could have a chance to run a set of benchmark runs with the jbd2 scalability patches, I'd be hugely interested to see how much difference they make. Thanks again! - Ted