From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alan Piszcz <ap@solarrain.com>
Subject: Re: EXT4 is ~2X as slow as XFS (593MB/s vs 304MB/s) for writes?
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 06:36:37 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002270634200.17433@p34.internal.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002270607020.17433@p34.internal.lan>
On Sat, 27 Feb 2010, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 27 Feb 2010, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 26 Feb 2010, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > >
>
> Hi,
>
> I have found the same results on 2 different systems:
>
> It seems to peak at ~350MiB/s performance on mdadm raid, whether
> a RAID-5 or RAID-0 (two separate machines):
>
> The only option I found that allows it to go from:
> 10737418240 bytes (11 GB) copied, 48.7335 s, 220 MB/s
> to
> 10737418240 bytes (11 GB) copied, 30.5425 s, 352 MB/s
>
> Is the -o nodelalloc option.
>
> How come it is not breaking the 350MiB/s barrier is the question?
>
> Justin.
>
>
Besides large sequential I/O, ext4 seems to be MUCH faster than XFS when
working with many small files.
EXT4
p63:/r1# sync; /usr/bin/time bash -c 'tar xf linux-2.6.33.tar; sync'
0.18user 2.43system 0:02.86elapsed 91%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 5216maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+971minor)pagefaults 0swaps
linux-2.6.33 linux-2.6.33.tar
p63:/r1# sync; /usr/bin/time bash -c 'rm -rf linux-2.6.33; sync'
0.02user 0.98system 0:01.03elapsed 97%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 5216maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+865minor)pagefaults 0swaps
XFS
p63:/r1# sync; /usr/bin/time bash -c 'tar xf linux-2.6.33.tar; sync'
0.20user 2.62system 1:03.90elapsed 4%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 5200maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+970minor)pagefaults 0swaps
p63:/r1# sync; /usr/bin/time bash -c 'rm -rf linux-2.6.33; sync'
0.03user 2.02system 0:29.04elapsed 7%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 5200maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+864minor)pagefaults 0swaps
So I guess that's the tradeoff, for massive I/O you should use XFS, else,
use EXT4?
I still would like to know however, why 350MiB/s seems to be the maximum
performance I can get from two different md raids (that easily do 600MiB/s
with XFS).
Is this a performance issue within ext4 and md-raid?
The problem does not exist with xfs and md-raid.
Justin.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-27 11:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-27 0:31 Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 0:46 ` Dmitry Monakhov
2010-02-27 1:05 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-28 0:56 ` Asdo
2010-02-28 9:59 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 0:51 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-02-27 1:08 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 1:12 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-02-27 1:28 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-02-27 10:14 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 10:51 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 11:09 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-02-27 11:36 ` Justin Piszcz [this message]
2010-02-28 5:42 ` tytso
2010-02-28 14:55 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-03-01 8:39 ` Andreas Dilger
2010-03-01 9:21 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-03-01 14:48 ` Michael Tokarev
2010-03-01 15:07 ` Justin Piszcz
2010-03-01 16:15 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-02-28 23:50 ` Dave Chinner
2010-03-02 0:08 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-03-02 0:37 ` Eric Sandeen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.00.1002270634200.17433@p34.internal.lan \
--to=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=ap@solarrain.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®