Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > tytso@xxxxxxx writes: > >> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 02:36:07PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: >>> > >>> > What benchmark were you using to test small file writes? This looks >>> > good to me as well, but we might want to do some extra benchmarking >>> > just to be sure we're not accidentally introducing a performance >>> > regression. >>> >>> iozone showed regressions for write and re-write in runs that include >>> fsync timings for small files (<8MB). Here's the command line used for >>> testing: >>> >>> iozone -az -n 4k -g 2048m -y 1k -q 1m -e >> >> iozone is showing performance regressions or performance improvements? >> I thought the point of this patch was to improve iozone benchmarks? > > Sorry, Ted, what I meant to say was that iozone showed differences > between deadline and cfq, where cfq's performance was much worse than > deadline's. And to be 100% clear, with the patch, the performance differences between deadline and cfq were in the noise. Cheers, Jeff -- 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
