From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Premysl Kouril <premysl.kouril@gmail.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: EXT4 vs LVM performance for VMs
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 11:53:19 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160212165319.GB7928@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+rfndJv2gUu=vxUktn3hWhUKHRv80gLgaRBCYRFMgRHcVcS1A@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 03:13:26PM +0100, Premysl Kouril wrote:
> The performance results which I posted in my original post are after
> all the block allocation is done. In other words: on the testing
> machine we do a first fio run which writes and allocates the testing
> file (during this first run the fio performance is actually much worse
> that what I reported, single VM performance is about 700 IOPS) and
> then we do second fio run and we take the benchmark numbers from this
> second run.
So you allocated the file using a random write workload, so the file
was probably not very contiguous. Whereas when you allocated the LVM
volume, it was probably allocated contiguously. You can use the
filefrag tool to see how fragmented the file might be.
All of this being said, what are you trying to do? If you are happy
using LVM, feel free to use it. If there are specific features that
you want out of the file system, it's best that you explicitly
identify what you want, and so we can minimize the cost of the
features of what you want.
Cheers,
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-12 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-11 20:50 EXT4 vs LVM performance for VMs Premysl Kouril
2016-02-12 6:12 ` Andi Kleen
2016-02-12 9:09 ` Premysl Kouril
2016-02-12 13:38 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-12 14:13 ` Premysl Kouril
2016-02-12 16:53 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2016-02-12 17:38 ` Premysl Kouril
2016-02-13 2:15 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-13 21:56 ` Sanidhya Kashyap
2016-02-13 23:40 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2016-02-14 0:01 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-15 18:56 ` Premysl Kouril
2016-02-15 19:11 ` Liu Bo
2016-02-15 23:10 ` Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160212165319.GB7928@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=premysl.kouril@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.