"Carlos E. R."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Content-ID:
On Sunday, 2013-10-27 at 11:14 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I'll post other set of results done on real hardware. The virtual machine simply does not have enough CPU power, and the virtual disk is also slow.
Here I repeat the test on real hardware. I have used a script with variations as I find out things; when the difference is significative, I repeated the test. I'll post the script below. I did this on my same main machine, but on a spare 1TB HD. I reuse the same test partition, creating a different filesystem in the script prior to testing it.
It was done on 12.3 system, I do not have available a 13.1 partition on this machine yet. Sorry about that.
The first test is simply one to try to fill the partition to capacity with very small files (100B), written to the same directory This is intentional: it is a kind of load for which reiserfs was designed for, as the goal of these tests is to find a replacement for reiserfs.
Well, reiserfs is still the king on this test, there is no replacement, period.
Filesystem formatting are all defaults, no adjustments of any kind.
Xfs has a speculative preallocation feature that is horrible for your workload in this test. If this workload is something you really care about then you should be willing to tune your mount options. Xfs has a bunch of them: https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/filesystems/xfs.txt In particular allocsize=4kb will disable preallocate and only allocate disk pages if you have data to put into it. Note that xfs reclaims unused preallocated space, but it takes time (days/weeks) and your test doesn't allow for that. Thus your benchmark is only useful if it is a workload you actually care about and not just a test. Greg -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org