Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ext3 vs Reiserfs benchmarks

[kwijibo@zianet.com]

I compared reiserfs with notails and with tails to
ext3 in journaled mode about a month ago.
Strangely enough the machine that was being
built is eventually slated for a mail machine.  I used
postmark to simulate the mail environment.

Benchmarks are available here:
http://labs.zianet.com

Let me know if I am missing any info on there.

Steven

Andreas Dilger wrote:

>On Jul 12, 2002  10:21 -0600, Dax Kelson wrote:
>  
>
>>ext3 data=ordered
>>ext3 data=writeback
>>reiserfs
>>reiserfs notail
>>
>>http://www.gurulabs.com/ext3-reiserfs.html
>>
>>Any suggestions or comments appreciated.
>>    
>>
>
>Did you try data=journal mode on ext3?  For real-life workloads sync-IO
>workloads like mail (e.g.  not benchmarks where the system is 100% busy)
>you can have considerable performance benefits from doing the sync IO
>directly to the journal instead of partly to the journal and partly to
>the rest of the filesystem.
>
>The reason why "real life" is important here is because the data=journal
>mode writes all the files to disk twice - once to the journal and again
>to the filesystem, so you must have some "slack" in your disk bandwidth
>in order to benefit from this increased throughput on the part of the
>mail transport.
>
>Cheers, Andreas
>--
>Andreas Dilger
>http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/
>http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
>  
>