Re: bonnie++ benchmarks for ext2,ext3,ext4,jfs,reiserfs,xfs,zfs on software raid 5
From: Miklos Szeredi
Date: Mon Jul 30 2007 - 15:40:20 EST
- Next message: Jan Engelhardt: "Re: [DRIVER SUBMISSION] DRBD wants to go mainline"
- Previous message: Gabriel C: "Re: Section mismatch warnings"
- In reply to: Al Boldi: "Re: bonnie++ benchmarks for ext2,ext3,ext4,jfs,reiserfs,xfs,zfs on software raid 5"
- Next in thread: Justin Piszcz: "Re: bonnie++ benchmarks for ext2,ext3,ext4,jfs,reiserfs,xfs,zfs onsoftware raid 5"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> Extrapolating these %cpu number makes ZFS the fastest.
>
> Are you sure these numbers are correct?
Note, that %cpu numbers for fuse filesystems are inherently skewed,
because the CPU usage of the filesystem process itself is not taken
into account.
So the numbers are not all that good, but according to the zfs-fuse
author it hasn't been optimized yet, so they may improve.
Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Next message: Jan Engelhardt: "Re: [DRIVER SUBMISSION] DRBD wants to go mainline"
- Previous message: Gabriel C: "Re: Section mismatch warnings"
- In reply to: Al Boldi: "Re: bonnie++ benchmarks for ext2,ext3,ext4,jfs,reiserfs,xfs,zfs on software raid 5"
- Next in thread: Justin Piszcz: "Re: bonnie++ benchmarks for ext2,ext3,ext4,jfs,reiserfs,xfs,zfs onsoftware raid 5"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]