From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S940004AbXG3VMb (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:12:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S939471AbXG3VMU (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:12:20 -0400 Received: from lucidpixels.com ([75.144.35.66]:60031 "EHLO lucidpixels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S939383AbXG3VMT (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:12:19 -0400 Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:12:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Justin Piszcz X-X-Sender: jpiszcz@p34.internal.lan To: Miklos Szeredi cc: a1426z@gawab.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: bonnie++ benchmarks for ext2,ext3,ext4,jfs,reiserfs,xfs,zfs on software raid 5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <200707302207.02672.a1426z@gawab.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >> Extrapolating these %cpu number makes ZFS the fastest. >> >> Are you sure these numbers are correct? > > Note, that %cpu numbers for fuse filesystems are inherently skewed, > because the CPU usage of the filesystem process itself is not taken > into account. > > So the numbers are not all that good, but according to the zfs-fuse > author it hasn't been optimized yet, so they may improve. > > Miklos > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > This was performed on an E6300, 1 core was ZFS/FUSE (or quite a bit of it anyway)