Using Disk Compression With Btrfs To Enhance Performance
Phoronix: Using Disk Compression With Btrfs To Enhance Performance
Earlier this month we delivered benchmarks comparing the ZFS, EXT4, and Btrfs file-systems from both solid-state drives and hard drives. The EXT4 file-system was the clear winner in terms of the overall disk performance while Btrfs came in second followed by Sun's ZFS in FreeBSD 8.2. It was a surprise that in our most recent testing the EXT4 file-system turned around and did better than the next-generation Btrfs file-system, but it turns out that Btrfs regressed hard in Linux 2.6.35 as to be found in Ubuntu 10.10 and other soon-to-be-released distributions. However, regardless of where Btrfs is performing, its speed can be boosted by enabling its transparent zlib compression support.
"Using Disk Compression With Btrfs To Enhance Performance"? But in the article itself you then claim there's no performance gain?
Yes, it was really great sarcasm.
Originally Posted by nanonyme
Oh. It was very subtle then
Not as subtle as mine.
Originally Posted by RealNC
"Using Disk Compression With Btrfs To Enhance Performance"
and ext4 wins most of the benchmarks... Pwned!
I don't really see the benefit of this article, in the knowledge that btrfs has a regression bug in 2.6.35 which is known to reduce performance by up to a factor of 10 in some workloads.
Originally Posted by thefirstm
What effect did compression have on the CPU usage?
The following benchmark with ZFS' compression algorithms, states that gzip compression was very CPU bound in regards to performance, compared to lzjb compression: http://don.blogs.smugmug.com/2008/10...ession-update/
I wonder why they've gone for gzip compression, instead of something lighter such as lzjb, when tests on ZFS show such difference when comparing the performance against the space saving.
They should have used lzo instead of gzip.
Anyway, the important thing, *again*, what does the test data of the benchmark programs look like? If it's only zeros, that's not a very fair or realistic benchmark, it'll be skewed in favor of compressed filesystems.
See the iozone benchmark, for example.
Tags for this Thread