All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andreas Rohner <andreas.rohner-hi6Y0CQ0nG0@public.gmane.org>
To: linux-nilfs <linux-nilfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] improve inode allocation
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 20:22:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5446A44C.9040002@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1413739031-13347-1-git-send-email-andreas.rohner-hi6Y0CQ0nG0@public.gmane.org>

Hi,

I extended the inode test to delete a certain number of inodes.

https://github.com/zeitgeist87/inodetest

This should make the benchmark a little bit more realistic, but the
results are essentially the same as before. For the following tests
about 10% of the inodes were continuously deleted:

1.) One process, 20 million inodes, 2 million deleted:
    a) Normal Nilfs
        $ time inodetest 1000 1000 20 100
        real    3m49.793s
        user    0m6.323s
        sys     2m47.947s

        $ time find ./ > /dev/null
        real    5m21.020s
        user    0m25.440s
        sys     1m6.633s
    b) Improved Nilfs
        $ time inodetest 1000 1000 20 100
        real    2m35.011s
        user    0m6.847s
        sys     1m33.093s

        $ time find ./ > /dev/null
        real    5m18.922s
        user    0m25.323s
        sys     1m6.877s
2.) Three processes in parallel, 60 million inodes, 6 million deleted
    a) Normal Nilfs
        $ time inodetest 1000 1000 20 100 &
        $ time inodetest 1000 1000 20 100 &
        $ time inodetest 1000 1000 20 100 &
        real    19m18.135s
        user    0m7.973s
        sys     16m16.833s

        $ time find ./ > /dev/null
        real    29m38.577s
        user    1m32.763s
        sys     4m44.140s
    b) Improved Nilfs
        $ time inodetest 1000 1000 20 100 &
        $ time inodetest 1000 1000 20 100 &
        $ time inodetest 1000 1000 20 100 &
        real    6m30.458s
        user    0m6.697s
        sys     3m10.213s

        $ time find ./ > /dev/null
        real    28m50.304s
        user    1m30.133s
        sys     4m40.770s


So the performance improved 32% for a single process and 66% for
multiple processes.

All benchmarks were run on an AMD Phenom II X6 1090T processor with 6
cores and 8 GB of RAM.

Best regards
Andreas Rohner
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

      parent reply	other threads:[~2014-10-21 18:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-19 17:17 [PATCH 0/1] improve inode allocation Andreas Rohner
     [not found] ` <1413739031-13347-1-git-send-email-andreas.rohner-hi6Y0CQ0nG0@public.gmane.org>
2014-10-19 17:17   ` [PATCH 1/1] nilfs2: " Andreas Rohner
2014-10-21 18:22   ` Andreas Rohner [this message]

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=5446A44C.9040002@gmx.net \
    --to=andreas.rohner-hi6y0cq0ng0@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-nilfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    /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.