Joe Conway <joe@conway-family.com> wrote:
>
> I've done some testing to see how Reiserfs performs
> vs ext2, and also various for various values of wal_sync_method while on a
> reiserfs partition. The attached graph shows the results. The y axis is
> transactions per second and the x axis is the transaction number. It was
> clear that, at least for my specific app, ext2 was significantly faster.
This is great, thanks a lot! Among other things it tells us, it appears
that fsync() is not the problem on Reiserfs. I don't know the details of
Reiserfs, but I think a lot of work has gone into optimizing it for very
small files, so you can use the file system as a simple database for
strings, a la Windows registry. I don't remember hearing about optimizing
for large files and large block reads and writes.
XFS, on the other hand, is used for very large files on SGI systems.
I think the XFS and Reiserfs folks will be happy to look at the performance
problem, but it would be very helpful for them to have a prepackaged
benchmark (or two or three) to use. We should set up an FTP area to share
them. Joe, can you contribute yours? Does anybody else have anything?
Already, Trond Eivind Glomsrød teg@redhat.com has volunteered to test on
XFS. The easier we make it, the more help we'll get.
Ken Hirsch