From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dirk Schenkewitz Subject: Re: Corrupted/unreadable journal: reiser vs. ext3 Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 11:48:14 +0100 Message-ID: <3E4A266E.2A258472@interface-ag.com> References: <93F527C91A6ED411AFE10050040665D0049C06D5@corpusmx1.us.dg.com> 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 Wayne, berthiaume_wayne@emc.com schrieb: > > Dirk, I'd be interested in hearing from you your performance > experience with ext3 when it reaches 96% full. Well (*shrug*), there seems to be nothing special about it. I did not do any timing test when such a fileysytem went full. In fact, becoming 100% full is not "mormal", it happens when I put stuff on it just to have it out of the way for some time. The filesystem is then used as some kind of "storage cellar". Aside from that - speed becomes noticeable (I believe, at least) when using 'xv' on a directory with lots of pictures, say, between 2000 and 3000, and the thumbnails are loaded during the first access. This takes more than a minute (estimated, I did not look at the clock). Another thing is when 'xv' creates the thumbnails. A few times it happened that a filesystem which was rather full ran out of space when creating the thumbnails. (That's not critical, all you "loose" are some of the thumbnails, which can be recreated any time later.) But I don't know how/when 'xv' stores the thumbnails, I only know that they are kept in memory as long as they are in use. Then linux itself does some buffering, so only the first access on a directory can make a testimony. That said, I can can only talk of my subjec- tive impressions, and I have not noticed any slowdown until there are 0 bytes left. But it is hard to tell, because the difference between 96% and 100% are only 320 MB on a 8 GB partition, and that space fills up rather fast. While you ask - what are the "amounts" of slowdown if a reiserfs gets more than 96% full? - Less than 4% percent? (I might not notice that.) - between 4% and 8%? (I might notice, but I can live with that easily. Then again, ext3 doesn't seem to have such problems.) - more than 8%, maybe much more? (That might become annoying. In that case I believe that ext3 is better for my purposes.) You see, I'm not an expert, I'm "just using filesystems". Please take the mentioned percentages as guesses - depending on the situation, I might not even notice 10% slowdown... Hope that answers your question - does it? Happy coding dirk -- Dirk Schenkewitz InterFace AG fon: +49 (0)89 / 610 49 - 126 Leipziger Str. 16 fax: +49 (0)89 / 610 49 - 83 D-82008 Unterhaching http://www.interface-ag.de mailto:dirk.schenkewitz@interface-ag.de