Search:

Great, different parts of the drive can perform differently. Or, it could be an alignment issue the write cache is hiding.

The easiest way to tell is to do the read test farther down the drive. ...

Thanks for trying this out, I think the best thing to do would be to nail down exactly how fast the device is.

dd if=/dev/xxx of=/dev/zero bs=20M iflag=direct count=409

/dev/xxx is whatever you...

Thanks for trying this out. nodatasum will improve both writes and reads because it isn't doing the checksum during the write.

On raid cards with writeback cache (and sometimes even single drives...

Thanks for giving btrfs a try. Usually when read results are too low it is because there isn't enough read ahead being done. The two easy ways to control readahead are to use a much larger buffer...

[QUOTE=sektion31;108954]oh thanks for clarification. i read that reiser4 and btrfs are more similar to each other than to ext3/4. so i assumed they have a similar design idea.

Just to clarify, the...

I'm Chris Mason, one of the btrfs developers. Thanks for taking the time to benchmark these filesystems!

Someone forwarded me the iozone parameters used, and it looks like they have iozone doing...

I'm not sure about nilfs, but ext4, Btrfs and XFS issue cache flushes on sata by default. For ext3 you'll want to mount -o barrier=1.

The Btrfs numbers on sqlite should improve with the 2.6.31...

Thanks, it is always fun to see btrfs benchmarking done. Sun doesn't really change the Btrfs development plan, we'll be pushing forward with features and generally getting the FS ready for...

Thanks for running these, just a note that the mount -o ssd option has changed quite a bit during 2.6.30-rc, so updating the kernel should give different results.

At least on my ssd, it does...