public inbox for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
To: debian developer <debiandev@gmail.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Updated performance results
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 08:56:06 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A7C3276.4020802@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f24d23310908070030u2ee49b41obcaafa5d7547cf69@mail.gmail.com>

debian developer wrote:
> HI,
>
> Do you have any benchmarks against non-raid common workloads?
> Like say a desktop user? It would be great to compare against ext3,
> ext4, xfs etc.,
>   
Yes, have had a little trouble with that box recently, but plenty of 
results based on the 2.6.29 kernels here:

http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/single-disk/History/History.html

If you are not familiar with the runs I have been doing, you can find 
the details of the benchmarking machine and test procedures here: 
http://btrfs.boxacle.net/

Steve

> Thanks,
>
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 2:05 AM, Chris Mason<chris.mason@oracle.com> wrote:
>   
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 04:10:41PM -0500, Steven Pratt wrote:
>>     
>>>> 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.
>>>       
>> I've been tuning the 128 thread large file streaming writes, and found
>> some easy optimizations.  While I'm fixing up these patches, could you
>> please do a streaming O_DIRECT write test run for me?  I think buffered
>> writeback in general has some problems right now on high end arrays.
>>
>> On my box 2.6.31-rc5 streaming buffered write with xfs only got at
>> 200MB/s (with the 128 thread ffsb workload).  Buffered btrfs goes at
>> 175MB/s.
>>
>> O_DIRECT btrfs runs at 390MB/s, while XFS varies a bit between 330MB/s
>> and 250MB/s.
>>
>> I'm using a 1MB write blocksize.
>>
>> -chris
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>     


  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-07 13:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-23 18:35 Updated performance results Steven Pratt
2009-07-23 21:00 ` Chris Mason
2009-07-23 22:04   ` Steven Pratt
2009-07-24 13:24     ` Chris Mason
2009-07-24 14:00       ` Chris Mason
2009-07-24 15:05         ` Steven Pratt
2009-07-28 20:12         ` Steven Pratt
2009-07-28 20:23           ` Chris Mason
2009-07-28 21:10             ` Steven Pratt
2009-08-05 20:35               ` Chris Mason
2009-08-07  7:30                 ` debian developer
2009-08-07 13:56                   ` Steven Pratt [this message]
2009-08-07 13:56                 ` Steven Pratt
2009-08-07 23:12                   ` Chris Mason
2009-08-31 17:49                     ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-11 19:29                       ` Chris Mason
2009-09-11 21:35                         ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-14 13:51                           ` Chris Mason
2009-09-14 17:20                             ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-14 21:41                             ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-14 23:13                               ` Chris Mason
2009-09-16  0:52                               ` Chris Mason
2009-09-16 15:15                                 ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-16 17:57                                   ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-16 18:07                                     ` Chris Mason
2009-09-16 18:15                                       ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-16 18:17                                         ` Chris Mason
2009-09-16 18:16                                       ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-16 18:20                                         ` Chris Mason
2009-09-16 18:37                                           ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-17 18:32                                 ` Eric Whitney
2009-09-17 18:39                                   ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-17 18:52                                     ` Chris Mason
2009-09-17 20:17                                       ` Chris Mason
2009-09-17 20:43                                         ` Chris Mason
2009-09-17 22:04                                           ` Steven Pratt
2009-09-18 20:14                                             ` Chris Mason
2009-09-23 15:24                                               ` Steven Pratt

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=4A7C3276.4020802@austin.ibm.com \
    --to=slpratt@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=debiandev@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