Re: Desktop Filesystem Benchmarks in 2.6.3

[Andrew Ho]

XFS is the best filesystem.


David Weinehall wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 03:33:13PM -0700, Dax Kelson wrote:
>  
>
> > On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 09:34, Peter Nelson wrote:
> >    
> >
> > > Hans Reiser wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm confused as to why performing a benchmark out of cache as opposed to 
> > > on disk would hurt performance?
> > >      
> > My understanding (which could be completely wrong) is that reieserfs v3
> > and v4 are algorithmically more complex than ext2 or ext3. Reiserfs
> > spends more CPU time to make the eventual ondisk operations more
> > efficient/faster.
> >
> > When operating purely or mostly out of ram, the higher CPU utilization
> > of reiserfs hurts performance compared to ext2 and ext3.
> >
> > When your system I/O utilization exceeds cache size and your disks
> > starting getting busy, the CPU time previously invested by reiserfs pays
> > big dividends and provides large performance gains versus more
> > simplistic filesystems.  
> >
> > In other words, the CPU penalty paid by reiserfs v3/v4 is more than made
> > up for by the resultant more efficient disk operations. Reiserfs trades 
> > CPU for disk performance.
> >
> > In a nutshell, if you have more memory than you know what do to with,
> > stick with ext3. If you spend all your time waiting for disk operations
> > to complete, go with reiserfs.
> >    
>
> Or rather, if you have more memory than you know what to do with, use
> ext3.  If you have more CPU power than you know what to do with, use
> ReiserFS[34].
>
> On slower machines, I generally prefer a little slower I/O rather than
> having the entire system sluggish because of higher CPU-usage.
>
>
> Regards: David Weinehall
>  


-
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/