Tested the flusher slightly
OGAWA Hirofumi
hirofumi at mail.parknet.co.jp
Sun Jun 23 08:54:21 PDT 2013
Hi,
I've tested the flusher slightly to see some tweak has any difference.
Pentium D (2 cores), 3GB memory, SATA HDD (no TCQ, UDMA133)
[Yeah, this is native machine, not kvm]
Test is "dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/file bs=4K count=1M" with following
changes.
1) Use WRITE command for save_sb()
2) Use WRITE_SYNC command for save_sb()
3) Add FLUSH command before save_sb()
As expected, for now, tux3 is slightly faster than ext4. Maybe, because
we are using the write-optimized block allocation(?).
And FLUSH command makes slower slightly. blocksize 512 makes slower, and
increase cpu systime, because probably buffer_head overhead, especially
sort of buffer_head (perf says buffer_index_cmp() is top cpu user).
[ext4]
4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 64.511 s, 66.6 MB/s
real 1m4.607s
user 0m0.428s
sys 0m9.580s
[4096 blocksize,WRITE]
4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 63.943 s, 67.2 MB/s
real 1m3.960s
user 0m0.276s
sys 0m7.832s
[4096 blocksize,WRITE_SYNC]
4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 63.821 s, 67.3 MB/s
real 1m3.834s
user 0m0.204s
sys 0m7.916s
[4096 blocksize,WRITE_SYNC,FLUSH]
4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 64.006 s, 67.1 MB/s
real 1m4.016s
user 0m0.196s
sys 0m7.840s
[512 blocksize,WRITE_SYNC]
4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 71.6808 s, 59.9 MB/s
real 1m11.755s
user 0m0.384s
sys 0m20.048s
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi at mail.parknet.co.jp>
More information about the Tux3
mailing list