Re: very poor read / write performance compared to other FS's?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:33:35PM +0100, Marek Fstump wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I am very interested in using BTRFS for my solution but in basic tests
> it seems to be very poor on read and write performance.  I am
> surprised by this so suspect that maybe I am doing something
> incorrectly or that there are updates I should be using, but I am not
> sure how I update BTRFS on SLES11
> 
> Summary:
> RESULTS on link below
> SLES11 SP1
> Compared Sequential read/write performance against XFS and OCFS2
> Backend storage â FusionIO SLC SSD = circa 750MBsec
> 
> Tests  set as follows:
> Filesystem contains 30 x 4GB files (made of random data)
> Read tests will read from 1 to 30 files concurrently
> Write tests will write 1 to 30 concurrent NEW files (simple 000âs)
> dd -direct flag used on writes
> 
> All defaults used for mounting etc.
> 
> Results shown in attachment.
> 
> BTRFS looks an excellent FS and perfect for my application and I am
> hoping that there are some factors that I am missing
> and would appreciate any advice / help
> 

Yeah our O_DIRECT performance is less than stellar, I just did a bunch of work
to try and help us get a little better performance.  Would you mind pulling
down linus's git tree and testing on that and seeing if you get better
performance?  Thanks,

Josef
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux