From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: File System Performance results
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:26:48 -0400
Message-ID: <1225308408.6448.287.camel@think.oraclecorp.com>
References: <48FF87CE.2090502@austin.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
To: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]:43381 "EHLO
	rgminet01.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753253AbYJ2T0z (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:26:55 -0400
In-Reply-To: <48FF87CE.2090502@austin.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 15:06 -0500, Steven Pratt wrote:
> We have set up a new page which is intended mainly for tracking the 
> performance of BTRFS, but in doing so we are testing other filesystems 
> as well (ext3, ext4, xfs and jfs).  Thought some people here might find 
> the results useful.

I think I understand the bad read performance in btrfs.  I was forcing a
tiny max readahead size.

The current git tree has fixes for it, along with a ton of new code.

-chris