From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Pratt Subject: Re: BTRFS Performance page Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 08:53:54 -0500 Message-ID: <48FF3072.7050404@austin.ibm.com> References: <48FE5593.2080209@austin.ibm.com> <20081022001437.GA23949@think.oraclecorp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: Chris Mason Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20081022001437.GA23949@think.oraclecorp.com> List-ID: Chris Mason wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:20:03PM -0500, Steven Pratt wrote: > >> As discussed on the BTRFS conference call, myself and Kevin Corry have >> set up some test machines for the purpose of doing performance testing >> on BTRFS. The intent is to have a semi permanent setup that we can use >> to test new features and code drops in BTRFS as well as to do >> comparisons to other file systems. The systems are pretty much fully >> automated for execution, so we should be able to crank out large numbers >> of different benchmarks as well as keep up with GIT changes. >> >> The data is hosted at http://btrfs.boxacle.net/. So far we have the data >> for the single disk tests uploaded. We should be able to upload results >> from the larger RAID config tomorrow. >> >> Initial tests were done with the FFSB benchmark and we picked 5 common >> workloads; create, random and sequential read, random write, and a mail >> server emulation. We plan to expand this based on feedback to include >> more FFSB tests and/or other workloads. >> >> All runs have complete analysis data with them (iostat, mpstat, >> oprofile, sar), as well as the FFSB profiles that can be used to >> recreate any test we ran. We also have collected blktrace data but not >> uploaded due to size. >> >> Please follow the results link on the bottom of the main page to get to >> the current results. Let me know what you like or don't like. I will >> post again when we get the RAID data uploaded. >> > > Very interesting data, thank you for posting this. The first comment > I'll make is that -o nodatacow requires -o nodatasum. The sums aren't > valid without the cow. > Thought that might be the case. Ok, we will drop this variation. > The FFSB mail server workload, does it do fsync writes? > No, but we have the ability to add that if we choose. > For the sequential read workload, I'm guessing (hoping) the files are > created in parallel? > Sorry, setup is still single threaded. Steve > -chris > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >