I've just started to work with btrfs so I started with a benchmark. On
four identical servers, (2 dual core cpus, single local disk), I built
filesystems - ext3, ext4, nilfs2, and btrfs. I checked out a sizable
code tree and timed a build. The build is parallelized to use 4 threads
when possible.
I'm seeing similar build times on ext[34] and nilfs2 but I'm seeing
almost double the times for btrfs using default options. And I'm having
trouble reconciling this performance cost with the benchmarks I'm seeing
around the net.
Is this a common result? Is there a trick to getting ext4 competitive
performance out of btrfs? Is my application a poor choice for btrfs?
Am I missing something obvious here?
--rich
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
