From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruce Guenter Subject: Re: ext4 unlink performance Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:48:48 -0600 Message-ID: <20081114154848.GA21361@untroubled.org> References: <20081113185712.GB11204@untroubled.org> <20081113191000.GA11516@untroubled.org> <20081113204240.GF21652@mit.edu> <20081114041121.GB11746@untroubled.org> <20081114145914.GE25117@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c" To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from zak.futurequest.net ([69.5.6.152]:60838 "HELO zak.futurequest.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751305AbYKNPsw (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Nov 2008 10:48:52 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081114145914.GE25117@mit.edu> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 09:59:14AM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > This is beginning to perhaps sound like a layout problem of some kind. > How big is the filesystem that you are testing against? The partition is almost 30GB. > I'm guessing > that if you have 725,000 small files, that it can't be much more than > a gig or two, right? The compressed stream itself expands to 4.4GB, and more on disk due to block sizes. > Can you send me the output of=20 >=20 > e2image -r /dev/XXX - | bzip2 ext4.e2i.bz2 >=20 > for both the ext4 and ext3 filesystems, after you have loaded them > with your small files, and before you delete them? Will do. Can you accept LZMA so I can save a bit of bandwidth? --=20 Bruce Guenter http://untroubled.org/ --sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFJHZ3g6W+y3GmZgOgRAvtIAKCWg6jFv4R6pcq/cH3yrudFaOl2sgCgnFkA yCPD3Gl3Vjc7n+ahckdOMkc= =DwXB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c--