From: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
To: Olivier Doucet <webmaster@ajeux.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BTRFS Benchmarking
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 12:07:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120504160749.GA1915@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPPqfY0iGPjRDC0YG814uiv4+9jLU54w6D5Yh=okTqG7VtwXOA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 06:03:50PM +0200, Olivier Doucet wrote:
> hello everyone,
>
> I made an overall benchmark of BTRFS against EXT4 and XFS. I'm quite
> unhappy with BTRFS results, so maybe tuning was not perfect.
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/ezameku/btrfs-benchmark
>
> All data is vectorial, so download the PDF and you can zoom ;)
>
> If you have any feedback on how to improve BTRFS results (and others
> fs too !), I would be glad to update my data.
>
> Test protocol
> Server : dual CPU Intel L5640 with HT enabled
> Operating system : CentOS 6.2 (64bits version) with custom tools/kernels
> Kernel : 3.3.0
> Btrfs progs: version 0.19
> Drive : Seagate 3TB drive (ST33000652SS) SAS attached via an LSI HBA.
> Drive was accessed through LVM ;
>
> MKFS options
> BTRFS : none
> XFS : none
> EXT4 : none
>
> Mount options
> BTRFS : "noatime,nodiratime"
> BTRFS compress : "noatime,nodiratime,compress=lzo"
> EXT4 : "noatime,nodiratime"
> XFS : "noatime,nodiratime"
>
> Benchmark is done with Sysbench (fileio test).
> Each benchmark was done for 60 seconds, and generated one point on the
> graph each second (to see variations).
> Right scale is block size.
>
> Data read / written is from /dev/urandom, so cannot be compressed much
> (that was expected behaviour).
>
> All second pages has no legend, I'm sorry for that :
> - data is 95 percentile aggregate.
> - colours are the same.
>
>
> Overview of results
>
> On sequential read, there is no variations between FS.
> On sequential write, BTRFS has lower values than EXT4/XFS. On random
> write also.
>
Not what I've been seeing at all, but we've been working a lot in this area
recently. Please retest with btrfs-next. Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-04 16:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-04 16:03 BTRFS Benchmarking Olivier Doucet
2012-05-04 16:07 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2012-05-04 22:23 ` cwillu
2012-05-07 18:42 ` Olivier Doucet
2012-05-07 19:06 ` Josef Bacik
2012-05-04 22:39 ` Hugo Mills
2012-05-04 23:15 ` Olivier Doucet
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=20120504160749.GA1915@localhost.localdomain \
--to=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=webmaster@ajeux.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).