From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932485AbWGSD4N (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:56:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932488AbWGSD4N (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:56:13 -0400 Received: from dsl081-085-109.lax1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([64.81.85.109]:64847 "EHLO toro.mainphrame.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932485AbWGSD4M (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:56:12 -0400 Message-ID: <44BDAD5C.5020209@mainphrame.com> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:56:12 -0700 From: joel Reply-To: joel@mainphrame.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060527) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: filesystem tuning hints? X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Please redirect me to an appropriate list if this is the wrong place - This is perhaps a naive question, but please bear with me: I recently had a chance to do some quick and dirty filesystem performance comparisons on a server here before putting it into production. I tested all the journaling filesystems available on stock suse linux enterprise server v9, using bonnie, tiobench, iozone, and dbench, which all showed similar trends - xfs tended to have steady performance and latency, jfs had low performance but low cpu usage, reiserfs got the best numbers in general, and ext3 results were all over the map. The dbench results are fairly indicative of the results as a whole. BTW - the mount options were basically "-noatime" on all filesystems. I also tested ext2 just out of curiosity, and it thrashed all the others by a large margin. Could I be doing something really really dumb here, or is this just the cost of journalling? Are there any dynamic kernel parameters which could bring any of the journalled filesystems performance to a more respectable level? Here are the dbench 3.04 results (MB/sec) plotted as nprocs vs fs type n ext2 ext3 jfs reiser xfs ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 239.45 180.94 35.30 209.02 154.44 2 438.83 287.87 36.34 324.25 157.31 4 807.57 389.64 35.81 475.24 154.95 8 1018.24 398.31 30.66 396.14 146.62 16 1003.61 354.79 27.10 403.79 139.17 32 1006.60 180.83 25.40 330.46 120.81 64 1007.61 117.39 24.88 107.89 79.18 128 1010.10 67.70 18.60 43.62 6.41 256 1005.33 26.55 4.10 34.98 7.27 512 973.30 18.00 2.97 29.61 5.34 1024 613.40 17.64 4.36 27.16 4.79 2048 84.05 13.53 16.37 23.29 3.84 Thanks & Regards, Joel