Re: Random write regression

Yan Zheng
2009-07-21T07:04:04Z

2009/7/20 Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>:
> Finally got around to going through latest data. =A0Seems like we los=
t all the
> random write performance gains. =A0Creates are better, but total regr=
ession on
> the random workload. =A0Sequential reads seem to have dropped as well=
=2E
>
> Results are uploading now.
> =A0http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/history/History.html
>
> These are for RAID only as single disk system still having issues com=
pleting
> btrfs runs. =A0Also, missing oprofile duw to oprofile causing an NMI =
and
> killing the system.
>
> Chris, this was built on 7/6, but I see no new changes sine 7/2/.
> Steve
>
>

The output of ffsb in the latest 128 threads random odirect write bench=
mark was
=2E...
checking existing fs: /mnt/ffsb1
fs setup took 6 secs
Syncing()...2 sec
=2E...

The corresponding output on 30 June was
=2E...
creating new fileset /mnt/ffsb1
fs setup took 847 secs
Syncing()...1 sec
=2E...

It seems the filesystem used in the latest benchmark wasn't freshly cre=
ated.

Yan, Zheng
--
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