Re: mkfs.xfs questions

[Christian Kujau <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, David Chinner wrote:
> For that data set size you tested. However you might find a
> difference if your tests actually write the data back to disk
> because a lot of the tests are running out of cache.
Ha, thanks for reminding me!
Now I remember why all my other tests were done with 2GB of data, having 
1GB of RAM ;)
> Typically, you need to be writing/reading files at least 2x the
> size of memory
I started a test with 4GB of data (bonnie++ -s 4096m) an hour ago...

> and create/delete a fileset of at least 1,000,000
> files to really determine differences in performance from
hm, that would be 'bonnie++ -n 1000' instead of the "-n 100" I'm testing 
right now.
Thanks for the hints, David! If you/someone know any 
better/closer-to-real-usage benchmarks, please let me know. I'm testing 
with bonnie++ because it I don't know any better. is iozone any 
good? is tiobench still worth to try?
Christian.
--
BOFH excuse #208:

Your mail is being routed through Germany ... and they're censoring us.