2.5.70 for 4 filesystems
Quoted 7 lines · [email protected] writes:
--------------- Sequential ----------
----- Create ----- ---- Delete ----
/sec %CPU Eff /sec %CPU Eff
2.5.70-reiserfs 7584 86.7 8751 2628 37.3 7038
2.5.70-xfs 1710 39.3 4347 2053 28.3 7247
2.5.70-ext2 150 99.0 151 60883 100.0 6088
2.5.70-ext3 119 95.0 126 26319 87.7 3002It's quite surprising that reiserfs is so slow at deletion. In my normal experience reiserfs rm -rf is much faster than anything else (e.g. with a big rm -rf on an ext2 you have a chance to ctrl-c still, on reiserfs no such chance; XFS is really slow at this). Perhaps this is some 2.5 regression? Do you have 2.4 comparison numbers?
-Andi
You should expect V3 to be slow at quad CPU smp benchmarks because balancing is giant locked. V4 fixes this with fine grained locking, we hope to release at Linux Tag in July. Fortunately quad CPU boxes will not be economical compared to dual CPU boxes until V4 has been out for a while....;-) V4 CPU usage and general performance has gotten a lot better, we need to put a new snapshot on our website.....
Quoted 30 lines · Andi Kleen
Quoted 9 lines · [email protected] writes:
--------------- Sequential ---------- ----- Create ----- ---- Delete ---- /sec %CPU Eff /sec %CPU Eff 2.5.70-reiserfs 7584 86.7 8751 2628 37.3 7038 2.5.70-xfs 1710 39.3 4347 2053 28.3 7247 2.5.70-ext2 150 99.0 151 60883 100.0 6088 2.5.70-ext3 119 95.0 126 26319 87.7 3002It's quite surprising that reiserfs is so slow at deletion. In my normal experience reiserfs rm -rf is much faster than anything else (e.g. with a big rm -rf on an ext2 you have a chance to ctrl-c still, on reiserfs no such chance; XFS is really slow at this). Perhaps this is some 2.5 regression? Do you have 2.4 comparison numbers?
(quoted diff) +0
-2-Andi -To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Signature · 1 line
Hans