Daniel Phillips <daniel@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 9:42:43 AM PDT, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> >> [dbench bakeoff] >> >> With dbench v4.00, tux3 seems to be king of the max_latency hill, but >> btrfs took throughput on my box. With v3.04, tux3 took 1st place at >> splashing about in pagecache, but last place at dbench -S. >> >> Hohum, curiosity satisfied. > > Thanks for that. Please keep in mind, that was our B team, it does a > full fs sync for every fsync. Maybe a rematch when the shiny new one > lands? Also, hardware? It looks like a single 7200 RPM disk, but it > would be nice to know. And it seems, not all dbench 4.0 are equal. > Mine doesn't have a -B option. Yeah, I also want to know hardware. Also, what size of partition? And each test was done by fresh FS (i.e. after mkfs), or same FS was used through all tests? My "hirofumi" branch in public repo is still having the bug to leave the empty block for inodes by repeat of create and unlink. And this bug makes fragment of FS very fast. (This bug is what I'm fixing, now.) If same FS was used, your test might hit to this bug. Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
