Re: reiserfs for bkbits.net?

[mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)]

Bryan Whitehead <driver@jpl.nasa.gov> writes:

> Måns Rullgård wrote:
>> Sander <sander@humilis.net> writes:
>>
>>>Larry McVoy wrote (ao):
>>>
>>>>We're moving openlogging back to our offices and I'm experimenting
>>>>with filesystems to see what gives the best performance for BK usage.
>>>>Reiserfs looks pretty good and I'm wondering if anyone knows any
>>>>reasons that we shouldn't use it for bkbits.net. Also, would it help
>>>>if the journal was on a different disk? Most of the bkbits traffic is
>>>>read so I doubt it.
>>>>
>>>>Please cc me, I'm not on the list.
>>>
>>>I've cc'ed the Reiserfs mailinglist.
>>>
>>>IME Reiserfs is a fast and stable fs. If you have the time to benchmark
>>>ext3, reiserfs, jfs and xfs (and ..) with bk then you would know first
>>>hand which fs is best for you. It might be worth the time.
>> If someone does any tests, I'd be interested to hear about the
>> results.
>>
>
> http://pcbunn.cacr.caltech.edu/gae/3ware_raid_tests.htm
>
> They needed 200MByte/sec disk transfer speed. this is how they got it.

I was thinking of typical BK workloads on less extreme hardware, in my
case software RAID 0+1 on normal IDE disks.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@kth.se