From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Lehmann Subject: write performance difference 3.18.21/git f2fs Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 07:25:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20150926052551.GA2243@schmorp.de> References: <20150925182646.GB6998@jaegeuk-mac02> <20150925182646.GB6998@jaegeuk-mac02> <20150925182034.GA6998@jaegeuk-mac02> <20150925182034.GA6998@jaegeuk-mac02> <01bf01d0f777$45df5ee0$d19e1ca0$@samsung.com> <01bf01d0f777$45df5ee0$d19e1ca0$@samsung.com> <20150926032218.GA4311@schmorp.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Zfhzj-0002LN-Pq for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 05:25:59 +0000 Received: from mail.nethype.de ([5.9.56.24]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Zfhzh-0006X0-US for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 05:25:59 +0000 Received: from [10.0.0.5] (helo=doom.schmorp.de) by mail.nethype.de with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Zfhzb-0006jk-NC for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 05:25:51 +0000 Received: from [10.0.0.1] (helo=cerebro.laendle) by doom.schmorp.de with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Zfhzb-0004GE-Iq for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 05:25:51 +0000 Received: from root by cerebro.laendle with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Zfhzb-0000b5-IK for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 07:25:51 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150926032218.GA4311@schmorp.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Ok, before I tried the f2fs git I made another short test with the original 3.18.21 f2fs, and it was as fast as before. Then I used the faulty f2fs module,. which forced a reboot. Now I started to redo the 3.18.21 test + git f2fs, with the same parameters (specifically, -s90), and while it didn't start out to be as slow as 4.2.1, it's similarly slow. After 218GiB, I stopped the test, giving me an average of 50MiB/s. Here is typical dstat output (again, dsk/sde): http://ue.tst.eu/7a40644b3432e2932bdd8c1f6b6fc32d.txt So less read behaviour than with 4.2.1, but also very slow writes. That means the performance drop moves with f2fs, not the kernel version. This is the resulting status: http://ue.tst.eu/6d94e9bfad48a433bbc6f7daeaf5eb38.txt Just for fun I'll start doing a -s64 run. -- The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG -----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net ----==-- _ generation ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp@schmorp.de -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------