Re: about ufs filesystem io performance!
- From: Eric Anderson <anderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 07:46:44 -0500
etalk etalk wrote:
5.3 vs 6.0 The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test command is “./iozone -A -f /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 1m -q 8k -y 2k -R -b outfile-Af.xls ” (http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all the tests on the same PC with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main memory. Figure1~Figure5 show the results of the file system performance comparison between Bsd5.3’s UFS2 and Bsd6.0’s UFS2 when testing with different file system (local, sync, async, softupdate, sync+softupdate).
According to the figures, our conclusion is: On all kinds of file systems, the write, rewrite, read and reread performance of the two is almost same and we cant say that Bsd6.0 make a improvement on file system IO performance.
http://blog.csdn.net/minerboyIo/Gallery/204114.aspx
linux2.6.11 vs bsd 5.3 The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test command is “./iozone -A -f /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 4m -q 8k -y 2k -R -b outfile-Af.xls ” (http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all the tests on the same PC with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main memory, Figure1, Figure2, Figure3 show the results of the file system performance comparison between Bsd’s UFS2 and Linux’ Ext3 (the Linux kernel version is 2.6.11, and the Bsd kernel version is 5.3) when testing with sync, async and local (Bsd using softupdate) file system. According to the figures, our conclusion is: a.On local file system and async file system, Fedora4’s write and rewrite is much faster than Bsd5.3’s (about 5-10 times). b.On all kinds of file systems, the read and reread performance of FreeBsd5.3 is about 50%-90% lower than that of Fedora4. c.On sync file system, Bsd5.3 writes several times faster than Fedora4 does and rewrites over two hundred times faster than Fedora4 does. http://blog.csdn.net/minerboyIo/Gallery/204107.aspx
You don't report the type of disks you are using, or anything about the storage. For the first test, I'd think that it's possible that you were hitting hardware performance bottlenecks before actually testing the filesystem performance.
Also, what are the 2,4,8 numbers referencing? How many times did you run the tests?
Eric
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology
Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Prev by Date: FBSD 5.x CPU performance on MSVS 2005
- Next by Date: Re: Poor Samba throughput on 6.0
- Previous by thread: FBSD 5.x CPU performance on MSVS 2005
- Next by thread: Re: about ufs filesystem io performance!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
