From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from magic.merlins.org ([209.81.13.136]:55136 "EHLO mail1.merlins.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752940Ab3C0VW4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Mar 2013 17:22:56 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:22:55 -0700 From: Marc MERLIN To: Mitch Harder Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: zlib vs lzo uncompress speed, ssd vs nossd Message-ID: <20130327212255.GF17613@merlins.org> References: <20130327165309.GA23559@merlins.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 04:12:27PM -0500, Mitch Harder wrote: > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote: > > > > Is my feeling of slower boot wrong, or is zlib also noticeably slower than > > lzo to read and decompress? > > > > Lzo compression should be faster in every aspect than zlib, especially > for reading. > > But having said that, btrfs won't recompress any existing files just > because you switch your mount option from lzo to zlib. Only newly > written files will be zlib, and btrfs will leave the lzo-compressed > files alone unless they are re-written, or you expressly recompress > them using the defrag tool. That was my intent at the time, I thought that zlib decompression was about as fast as lzo, so it would have been good that most my files stayed compressed as zlib. Turns out I was wrong :) > If you were to take a snapshot of your root partition, and reboot to > the snapshot as the new root with zlib compression, you could make > some side-by-side comparisons of boot time to clarify your > impressions. Fair point. By that, you mean degrag all my files somehow (recompressing as lzo, and doubling the size of my rootfs)? Also, I was re-reading ssd vs nossd: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Mount_options isn't clear whether these are read/write ordering optimizations, or filesystem layout optimization (i.e. you'd have to recreate the entire FS, and rewrite everything). http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=btrfs_ssd_mode&num=1 says 'However, unless disabling the write cache for the drive, the SSD mode does not necessarily mean better performance. In fact, as our results are about to show, the quantitative disk performance can drop greatly in the SSD mode when the write cache remains enabled' But that's from 2009, so not very relevant to today. Do you happen to know more than me on this? Marc -- "A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R. Microsoft is to operating systems .... .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/