Andreas Dilger wrote: > The question is what the "best" result is for this kind of workload? > In HPC applications the common case is that you will also have the data > files read back in parallel instead of serially. Agreed, I'm not trying to argue what's better or worse, I'm just seeing what it's doing. The main reason I did sequential reads back is that it more clearly shows the file layout for each file on the graph. :) I'm just getting a handle on how the allocations are going for various types of writes. > The test shows ext4 finishing marginally faster in the write case, and > marginally slower in the read case. What happens if you have 4 parallel > readers? I'll test that a bit later (have to run now); I expect parallel readers may go faster, since the blocks are interleaved, and it might be able to suck them up pretty much in order across all 4 files. I'd also like to test some of this under a single head, rather than on HW raid... -Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
