> On Jun 30, 2015, at 15:37, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Yan, Zheng <zyan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I tried 4.1 kernel and 0.94.2 ceph-fuse. their performance are about the same. >> >> fuse: >> Files=191, Tests=1964, 60 wallclock secs ( 0.43 usr 0.08 sys + 1.16 cusr 0.65 csys = 2.32 CPU) >> >> kernel: >> Files=191, Tests=2286, 61 wallclock secs ( 0.45 usr 0.08 sys + 1.21 cusr 0.72 csys = 2.46 CPU) > > On Friday, I tried stock 3.10 vs 4.1 and they were about the same as > well (a few tests failed in 3.10 though). However Dan is using > 3.10.0-229.7.2.el7.x86_64, which is 3.10 with a lot of backports, so > it's not quite the same. Dan, are the numbers you are seeing > consistent? > I just tried 3.10.0-229.7.2.el7 kernel. it’s a little slower than 4.1 kernel 4.1: Files=191, Tests=2286, 61 wallclock secs ( 0.45 usr 0.07 sys + 1.24 cusr 0.76 csys = 2.52 CPU) 3.10.0-229.7.2.el7: Files=191, Tests=1964, 75 wallclock secs ( 0.45 usr 0.09 sys + 1.73 cusr 5.04 csys = 7.31 CPU) Dan, did you run the test on the same client machine. I think network latency affects run time of this test a lots Regards Yan, Zheng _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |