From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Juan Piernas Canovas <piernas@ditec.um.es>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>,
sfaibish <sfaibish@emc.com>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] DualFS: File System with Meta-data and Data Separation
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:57:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070215235716.GA14199@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0702152152460.19998@ditec.inf.um.es>
> >Also many storage subsystems have some internal parallelism
> >in writing (e.g. a RAID can write on different disks in parallel for
> >a single partition) so i'm not sure your distinction is that useful.
> >
> But we are talking about a different case. What I have said is that if you
> use two devices, one for the 'regular' file system and another one for the
> log, DualFS is better in that case because it can use the log for reads.
> Other journaling file systems can not do that.
Shadow paging based systems typically can, but we have no widely used
one on Linux (reiser4 would be probably the closest)
> >If you stripe two disks with a standard fs versus use one of them
> >as metadata volume and the other as data volume with dualfs i would
> >expect the striped variant usually be faster because it will give
> >parallelism not only to data versus metadata, but also to all data
> >versus other data.
> >
> If you have a RAID system, both the data and meta-data devices of DualFS
> can be stripped, and you get the same result. No problem for DualFS :)
Sure, but then you need four disks. And if your workloads happens
to be much more data intensive than metadata intensive the
stripped spindles assigned to metadata only will be more idle
than the ones doing data.
Stripping everything from the same pool has the potential
to adapt itself to any workload mix better.
I can see that you win for some specific workloads, but it is
hard to see how you can win over a wide range of workloads
because of that.
>
> >Also I would expect your design to be slow for metadata read intensive
> >workloads. E.g. have you tried to boot a root partition with dual fs?
> >That's a very important IO benchmark for desktop Linux systems.
> >
> I do not think so. The performance of DualFS is superb in meta-data read
> intensive workloads . And it is also better than the performance of other
> file system when reading a directory tree with several copies of the Linux
> kernel source code (I showed those results on Tuesday at the LSF07
> workshop)
PDFs available?
Is that with running a LFS style cleaner inbetween or without?
I would be interested in a "install distro with installer ; boot afterwards
from it" type benchmark. Do you have something like this?
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-15 23:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <op.tnkdlbgsrwwil4@brcsmondepl2c.corp.emc.com>
2007-02-14 21:10 ` [ANNOUNCE] DualFS: File System with Meta-data and Data Separation sfaibish
2007-02-14 21:57 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-02-15 18:38 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-15 20:09 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-15 22:59 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-16 9:13 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-16 11:05 ` Benny Amorsen
2007-02-16 23:47 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-02-17 15:11 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-17 18:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-02-17 18:36 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-17 20:47 ` Sorin Faibish
2007-02-18 5:59 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-18 12:46 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-19 23:57 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-20 0:10 ` Bron Gondwana
2007-02-20 0:30 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-21 4:36 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-21 12:37 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-21 18:31 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-21 19:25 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-22 4:30 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-22 16:25 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-22 19:57 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-23 13:26 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-24 22:35 ` Sorin Faibish
2007-02-25 2:41 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-25 12:01 ` Jörn Engel
2007-02-26 3:48 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-20 20:43 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-02-15 20:38 ` Andi Kleen
2007-02-15 19:46 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-02-16 1:43 ` sfaibish
2007-02-15 21:09 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-15 23:57 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2007-02-16 4:57 ` Juan Piernas Canovas
2007-02-26 11:49 ` Yakov Lerner
2007-02-26 13:08 ` Matthias Schniedermeyer
2007-02-26 13:24 ` Sorin Faibish
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=20070215235716.GA14199@one.firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=piernas@ditec.um.es \
--cc=sfaibish@emc.com \
/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