xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: different behaviour between XFS and ext3

To: Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: different behaviour between XFS and ext3
From: Blair Barnett <bbarnett@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 06:59:00 -0700
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Organization: Monta Vista Software, Inc
References: <3F283E36.778CC934@mvista.com> <3F28E34D.3EE2CF4A@ch.sauter-bc.com>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Simon, et al,

I used stock kernel.org sources with SGI's XFS patches:

for XFS 1.1, I used the 2.4.18 kernel
for XFS 1.2, I used the 2.4.19 kernel
for XFS 1.3pre, I used the 2.4.21 kernel

The only reason I did this was to be complete with my tests. As I said
in a previous email, I just naively thought that sync would actually
flush all the data to the disk. The disk is an IDE disk with a 2MB
cache.

I thought that the disk cache might be the cause of the results, so
I added sleeps of from 1 - 10 seconds. No difference in my results were
seen.

One of the reasons I included the script was for anyone interested in
the the phenomenon I think I found, to actually run the script on their
system and if different results were obtained, we could figure out what
was different.

Thanks so far to all who've taken up this thread. I like XFS for it's
throughput but if data integrity is not guaranteed through a sync call,
I have my reservations about it.

-blair


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>