linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
To: Kai Krakow <hurikhan77+btrfs@gmail.com>
Cc: <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why does btrfs benchmark so badly in this case?
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 09:48:40 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130812134840.GA2150@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8u3gda-evs.ln1@hurikhan77.spdns.de>

On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 11:35:33PM +0200, Kai Krakow wrote:
> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> schrieb:
> 
> >> So I guess the reason that ZFS does well with that workload is that
> >> ZFS is using smaller blocks, maybe just 512B ?
> > 
> > Yeah I'm not sure what ZFS does, but if you are writing over a block and
> > the size/offset isn't aligned then you'd see similar issues with ZFS since
> > it would
> > have to read+modify+write.  It is likely that ZFS just is using a smaller
> > blocksize.
> 
> From what I remember, ZFS uses dynamic block sizes. However, block size can 
> be forced and thus tuned for workloads that require it:
> 
> http://www.joyent.com/blog/bruning-questions-zfs-record-size
> 
> Maybe that's the reason...
> 
> It would be interesting to see how the benchmarks performed with forced 
> block size.
> 

When I did bs=4k in the fio job to force it to use 4k blocksizes we performed
the same as ext4 and xfs.  Thanks,

Josef

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-12 13:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-08 16:13 Why does btrfs benchmark so badly in this case? John Williams
2013-08-08 17:29 ` Josef Bacik
2013-08-08 18:37 ` Clemens Eisserer
2013-08-08 19:40 ` Josef Bacik
2013-08-08 20:23   ` John Williams
2013-08-08 20:38     ` Josef Bacik
2013-08-09 21:35       ` Kai Krakow
2013-08-12 13:48         ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2013-08-08 20:59     ` Chris Murphy
2013-08-08 21:25       ` Zach Brown

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=20130812134840.GA2150@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=jbacik@fusionio.com \
    --cc=hurikhan77+btrfs@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.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 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).