From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:39174 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755482Ab2IQKAI (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:00:08 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TDY7Y-0003VO-8d for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 12:00:04 +0200 Received: from 50C58B65.flatrate.dk ([80.197.139.101]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 12:00:04 +0200 Received: from casper.bang by 50C58B65.flatrate.dk with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 12:00:04 +0200 To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org From: Casper Bnag Subject: Re: Experiences: Why BTRFS had to yield for ZFS Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 09:55:47 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20120917091543.GC29881@charite.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Ralf Hildebrandt charite.de> writes: > > * Casper Bang gmail.com>: > > > Oracle (Unbreakable) Linux x64 2.6.39-200.29.3.el6uek.x86_64 #1 SMP > > And the btrfs was that from vanilla 2.6.39 (i.e. over a year old)? > We're using the latest available kernel for our Oracle Unbreakable Linux 6.3 from Aug 28. We have no other option, since the Oracle database software needs to run on a certified distro. I have no idea how to check the version Oracle actually compiles with, only the tools package has easy-to-grasp version info. In any event, I would think it unlikely that the performance differences we see is the result of missing performance tweeks - we're talking an order of magnitude here and that smells of a design difference.