Re: Updated performance results

[Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>]

Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 03:12:38PM -0500, Steven Pratt wrote:
>   
>> Chris Mason wrote:
>>     
>>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 09:24:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
>>>       
>>>>> Sure, will try to get to it tomorrow.
>>>>>           
>>>> Sorry, I missed a fix in the experimental branch.  I'll push out a
>>>> rebased version in a few minutes.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Ok, the rebased version is ready to use.
>>>       
>> New results are up for both with and without nodatacow.  Not much change.
>>
>> http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/history/History.html
>>
>> Have another run going with nodatacow and ssd.
>>     
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> I think I'm going to start tuning something other than the
> random-writes, there is definitely low hanging fruit in the large file
> creates workload ;)  Thanks again for posting all of these.
>   
Sure, no problem.

> The history graph has 2.6.31-rc btrfs against 2.6.29-rc ext4.  Have you
> done more recent runs on ext4?
>
>   
Yes, thanks for pointing that out, had so many issues I forgot to update 
the graphs for other file systems.  Just pushed new graphs with data for 
2.6.30-rc7 for all the other file systems.  This was from your 
"newformat" branch from June 6th.

Steve

> -chris
>