sorry but this is ridiculous
I once posted a correction (which showed an error and got me to post again which said I should wait 45 secs)
and the reward is a triple post
next run please inclue XFS
when you do the next round of such tests, please include XFS. I know that it's now new and sexy, but it's still reliably outperforming many of the filesystems in the test
I think the biggest problem here is Michael don't know how to make a kernel for Ubuntu, so he's used Zen from a PPA / http://liquorix.net/
Correct me if I'm wrong here
Stop with the SSD
I said this once before, but I guess Phoronix doesn't care.
Please use a standard hard drive. Preferably a laptop drive because those are the majority of hard drives today. Laptops/netops outsell standard desktops now.
Btrfs is the only file-system with SSD optimizations that you tested.
The other file-systems are designed with rotational media in mind. Reiser4 is especially tweaked to make seeks minimized.
With an SSD you are not really testing the algorithms. Seeks are nearly instantaneous. You are testing the CPU/chipset/controller bottleneck.
On a traditional HD, the seeks during small and random i/o determine the performance more than anything else.
I appreciate the time you put into the testing, but honestly your results are pretty much meaningless for most people. The market for SSD's are still insignificantly small with home users.
I disagree with you a bit here.
Originally Posted by hechacker1
it would be nice to see both SSD and rotational tests that are comparable, both so that people considering SSDs can see what difference is made, and also to find out where a particular filesystem may fall behind on a fast disk setup.
There was a thread on linux-kernel this past week where EXT4 was showing significantly worse performance than XFS on large file writes, but only on systems with fast disk arrays (basically ext4 maxes out at about 60% the performance of XFS) I don't expect Phoronix to have such high-end disk arrays around to test with, but testing with SSDs is likely to show similar problems.
now if all you care about is 'your typical home user', then Phronix tests don't really matter much anyway, your typical home user isn't tweaking things, just installing the default setup.
however, there are 'home users' who spend hundreds of dollars for a video card, for people like that, SSDs are very much within their price range.
The Larger Problem
Which Distribution allows you to boot Reiser4 as the root file system?
Butter has a file system converter.
That's backwards. Phoronix ONLY tests the default setup. It's us tweakers to which the results don't apply.
Originally Posted by dlang
I wish he would test ext4 on a mechanical laptop drive with barrier=0, noatime vs relatime, and writeback vs ordered. Plus xfs with all the tweaks its fans recommend, and reiser4 with lzo compression enabled.