Re: [Lse-tech] Re: ext3 performance bottleneck as the number of spindles gets large

From: John Hawkes (hawkes@sgi.com)
Date: Thu Jun 20 2002 - 15:47:32 EST


From: "Dave Hansen" <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
> > We'll report out our findings on the lock contention, and throughput
> > data for some other FS then. I'd like recommendations on what file
> > systems to try, besides ext2.
>
> Do you really need a journaling FS? If not, I think ext2 is a sure
> bet to be the fastest. If you do need journaling, try reiserfs and
jfs.

XFS in 2.4.x scales much better on larger CPU counts than do ext3 or
ReiserFS. That's because XFS is a much lighter user of the BKL in 2.4.x
than ext3, ReiserFS, or ext2.

John Hawkes
hawkes@sgi.com

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 23 2002 - 22:00:23 EST