Re: [benchmarks] various filesystems on 2.5.68

From: rwhron@earthlink.net
Date: Mon Apr 28 2003 - 16:41:04 EST

Next message: Roman Zippel: "Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!]"
Previous message: Timothy Miller: "Re: Swap Compression"
Maybe in reply to: rwhron@earthlink.net: "[benchmarks] various filesystems on 2.5.68"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> You should benchmark us with notail option if you want it to be fair
> compared to less space conserving filesystems.

Thanks, I'll start using notail on reiserfs.

>> ----- Create ----- ---- Delete ----
>> files /sec %CPU Eff /sec %CPU Eff
>>2.5.68-ext3 65536 10828 70.3 15395 21160 98.0 2159
>>2.5.68-reiserfs 131072 2935 37.3 7861 1787 25.7 6963

> What is the meaning of the files parameter, and why is our number
> different from the other filesystems?

I'll fix that too. reiserfs has been more efficient than ext2 with
a lot of files. Using less than 131072 files wasn't giving results for
some tests on reiserfs.

-- Randy Hron http://home.earthlink.net/~rwhron/kernel/bigbox.html

- 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/

Next message: Roman Zippel: "Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!]"
Previous message: Timothy Miller: "Re: Swap Compression"
Maybe in reply to: rwhron@earthlink.net: "[benchmarks] various filesystems on 2.5.68"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 22:00:30 EST