On Freitag, 13. August 2010 Stan Hoeppner wrote: > Some benchmark results maybe worth a look: > http://btrfs.boxacle.net/repository/raid/2.6.35-rc5/2.6.35-rc5/ Thanks - it would have been great to see xfs with delaylog in that comparison, but the graphs are very very nice. XFS seems performing better the more threads there are, just in "large file random reads" it's the slowest - why this? A test with "lots of small files in a dir" would be great, something like the squid cachedir or just a single dir with >5.000 files in it. -- mit freundlichen Grüssen, Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc it-management Internet Services http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee] Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31 ****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ****** http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html // Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen: // http://zmi.at/langegg/ // http://zmi.at/haus2009/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
