Received: by oss.sgi.com id ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 00:06:55 -0700 Received: from deliverator.sgi.com ([204.94.214.10]:52582 "EHLO deliverator.sgi.com") by oss.sgi.com with ESMTP id ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 00:06:38 -0700 Received: from madurai.engr.sgi.com (madurai.engr.sgi.com [163.154.5.75]) by deliverator.sgi.com (980309.SGI.8.8.8-aspam-6.2/980310.SGI-aspam) via ESMTP id SAA23352 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 18:45:57 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (ananth@sgi.com) Received: from sgi.com (mango.engr.sgi.com [163.154.5.76]) by madurai.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id SAA36545 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 18:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <393EFB9A.E34181FD@sgi.com> Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 18:49:14 -0700 From: Rajagopal Ananthanarayanan X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.10-1SGI_11smp i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: lmdd performance results XFS vs. Ext2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Return-Path: X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-xfs-outgoing Results of write performance tests: ---------------------------------- Sequential write using lmdd, file size is ~209MB on a 2 CPU system with total memory of 64M. The experiment is run over varying write-size from 1K to 1024K, 3 times for each block-size. This shows 1. Ext2 is well tuned (hardly any variation in 3 runs of each blocksize)! 2. XFS is sometimes faster than ext2 by upto ~8% [see best of ext2 & XFS for blocksize = 128K] 3. XFS is significantly slower for smaller block sizes; obviously, this will get a serious investigation. In results not shown here, I've tried changing the max_bomb_segments for the elevator. If that's made 128 (from default of 4), XFS shows a larger improvement than ext2 (and hence faster in absolute comparison) when lmdd was run with an 80M file ... ========= EXT2 ============== ========== XFS ================= --------- bs 1k --------------------- --------- bs 1k --------------------- 209 MB in 25.8872 secs, 8.1011 MB/sec 209 MB in 66.8429 secs, 3.1374 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.0768 secs, 8.0422 MB/sec 209 MB in 63.9422 secs, 3.2798 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.8838 secs, 8.1022 MB/sec 209 MB in 72.2050 secs, 2.9044 MB/sec --------- bs 2k --------------------- --------- bs 2k --------------------- 209 MB in 25.9659 secs, 8.0766 MB/sec 209 MB in 73.4797 secs, 2.8541 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9699 secs, 8.0753 MB/sec 209 MB in 71.7631 secs, 2.9223 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9524 secs, 8.0808 MB/sec 209 MB in 68.3827 secs, 3.0668 MB/sec --------- bs 4k --------------------- --------- bs 4k --------------------- 209 MB in 25.8631 secs, 8.1087 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9783 secs, 8.0727 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9394 secs, 8.0848 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.0063 secs, 8.0640 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9258 secs, 8.0890 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9974 secs, 8.0668 MB/sec --------- bs 8k --------------------- --------- bs 8k --------------------- 209 MB in 25.9280 secs, 8.0884 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.2227 secs, 7.9975 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9461 secs, 8.0827 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.0199 secs, 8.0598 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9381 secs, 8.0852 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.7873 secs, 8.1325 MB/sec --------- bs 16k --------------------- --------- bs 16k --------------------- 209 MB in 25.9254 secs, 8.0892 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9637 secs, 8.0773 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9548 secs, 8.0800 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9407 secs, 8.0844 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9402 secs, 8.0846 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.6131 secs, 8.1878 MB/sec --------- bs 32k --------------------- --------- bs 32k --------------------- 209 MB in 25.9289 secs, 8.0881 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.2230 secs, 7.9974 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9363 secs, 8.0858 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.3995 secs, 7.9439 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9649 secs, 8.0769 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.0111 secs, 8.0625 MB/sec --------- bs 64k --------------------- --------- bs 64k --------------------- 209 MB in 25.9703 secs, 8.0752 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9666 secs, 8.0763 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9454 secs, 8.0829 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.7235 secs, 8.1527 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.8699 secs, 8.1065 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.8677 secs, 8.1072 MB/sec --------- bs 128k -------------------- --------- bs 128k -------------------- 209 MB in 25.9687 secs, 8.0757 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.7309 secs, 8.1503 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9388 secs, 8.0850 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.1500 secs, 8.0197 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.8078 secs, 8.1260 MB/sec 209 MB in 23.9588 secs, 8.7531 MB/sec --------- bs 256k -------------------- --------- bs 256k -------------------- 209 MB in 25.9597 secs, 8.0785 MB/sec 209 MB in 24.2083 secs, 8.6629 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9346 secs, 8.0863 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.2000 secs, 8.0044 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9656 secs, 8.0767 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.4935 secs, 8.2262 MB/sec --------- bs 512k -------------------- --------- bs 512k -------------------- 209 MB in 25.9436 secs, 8.0835 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.0051 secs, 8.3869 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.0026 secs, 8.0652 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.3881 secs, 8.2604 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9865 secs, 8.0702 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9335 secs, 8.0867 MB/sec --------- bs 1024k ------------------- --------- bs 1024k ------------------- 209 MB in 25.9667 secs, 8.0763 MB/sec 209 MB in 26.1679 secs, 8.0142 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9906 secs, 8.0689 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9283 secs, 8.0883 MB/sec 209 MB in 25.9843 secs, 8.0709 MB/sec 209 MB in 24.9323 secs, 8.4114 MB/sec -------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajagopal Ananthanarayanan ("ananth") Member Technical Staff, SGI. --------------------------------------------------------------------------