From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tao Ma Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:58:47 +0800 Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 0/3] ocfs2: Inode Allocation Strategy Improvement.v2 In-Reply-To: <1232122135.6601.51.camel@tristan-laptop.cn.oracle.com> References: <1232056719-27716-1-git-send-email-tao.ma@oracle.com> <1232093128.6601.12.camel@tristan-laptop.cn.oracle.com> <49704272.4080000@oracle.com> <1232122135.6601.51.camel@tristan-laptop.cn.oracle.com> Message-ID: <4972EF47.5090202@oracle.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com tristan.ye wrote: > On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 16:16 +0800, Tao Ma wrote: > >> tristan.ye wrote: >> > Tao, > > I've done 10 times tests with single-node testcase repeatly, following > is a average statistic reports > =============== Tests with 10 times iteration================ > > 1st 'Tar xjvf' result: > > Average real time with 10 times: > Original kernel kernel with enhanced patches > 0m 43.578s 0m 49.355s > > 1st 'ls -lR' result: > Average real time with 10 times: > Original kernel kernel with enhanced patches > 0m 23.622s 0m 23.508s > > 1st 'rm -rf' result: > Average real time with 10 times: > Original kernel kernel with enhanced patches > 0m 57.039s 0m 58.612s > > 2rd 'Tar xjvf' result: > Average real time with 10 times: > Original kernel kernel with enhanced patches > 0m 49.550s 0m 52.214s > > 2rd 'ls -lR' result: > Average real time with 10 times: > Original kernel kernel with enhanced patches > > 0m 23.591s 0m 23.487s > > ===============Tests end============================ > > > >From above tests, we really have had a speed-up performance gain when > traversing files by 'ls -lR' against a kernel tree:),but seems also > encountered a performance lose when populating the files by 'tar xvjf' > according to the contrast tests. > I am just a little confused with your test result. Especially the last one. from the statistics, it looks that there is almost no performance gain comparing 0m23.591s with 0m 23.487s. But I see >2mins every time. So are you sure of it? anyway, thanks for your test and I will discuss it with you later. Regards, Tao