From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dark Shadow Subject: Why is Reiser4 slower then ReiserFS v3 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:38:12 -0700 Message-ID: <231dafb5041227123867a2c873@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: Dark Shadow Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: reiserfs-list@namesys.com I am running a Linux from Scratch system and I just upgraded to Linux kernel 2.6.10-cko1 (first time away from a vanilla kernel) in order to try out Reiser4 but after formatting a drive I noticed it is slower here is the best test I could run I have three hard drives so I took a file from one and copied it to the others and timed it source drive /dev/hda Reiser3 Western Digital 40gb 7200rpm target1 drive /dev/hdb Reiser4 Western Digital 80gb 7200rpm target2 drive /dev/sda Reiser3 Seagate 160gb 7200rpm (SATA but still same rpm as rest so it should be the same) time cp ~/800mb.file /target1 real 0m41.409s user 0m0.010s sys 0m4.364s time cp ~/800mb.file /target2 real 0m38.318s user 0m0.017s sys 0m5.627s What formatting command would I use the get best speed for the following situation capturing raw uncompressed 720x480x29.97 video from my pci tv card. The best I got with reiserfs v3 was 640x480x29.97 and it would end up making a 50gb file in 64 minutes.