On 10/07/2010 12:59 AM, Adam Carter wrote:
> WOW! Those differences are crazy!
> 
> 
>     Please - I know benchmarking takes a lot of time - but could you check
>     something: the behavior those fs have at what time they flush data from
>     cache to disk is very different. Have you made sure that you measured
>     the time it really needs? I mean the difference between:
> 
>     $ sync; time cp source dest
>     and
>     $ sync; time (cp source dest; sync)
> 
>     Only the last measures somewhat correctly.
> 
> 
> I had noticed that there was, say, 5 seconds of disk activity after the
> cp command complete which I assumed was buffers getting flushed, but 5
> seconds didnt seem that significant overall. I will run the tests as you
> suggest and post back. Do you think btrfs (with or without compression)
> would be faster than reiser? If so I will try that as well.
On my system it is twice as fast as reiser3 for _lots_ (200.000) of
small files with compression on (didn't test is without compression). I
didn't test if with big files.

But your results may vary anyway. For example btrfs is very
cpu-intensive (even more with compression). If you've got a slow cpu
(like in embedded devices), jfs might perform better.

BTW: _all_ my partitions are encrypted and on LVM, so your use case is
probably very different :)

Bye,
Daniel

-- 
PGP key @ http://pgpkeys.pca.dfn.de/pks/lookup?search=0xBB9D4887&op=get
# gpg --recv-keys --keyserver hkp://subkeys.pgp.net 0xBB9D4887