Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: Linux 3.3 Kernel: Btrfs vs. EXT4

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,678

    Default Linux 3.3 Kernel: Btrfs vs. EXT4

    Phoronix: Linux 3.3 Kernel: Btrfs vs. EXT4

    It's that time of the Linux kernel development cycle again... Here are benchmarks of the EXT4 and Btrfs file-systems with the soon-to-be-released Linux 3.3 kernel.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17111

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    71

    Default Disappointed by BTRFS

    I am disappointed by the stock performance of BTRFS. It has been said to be the next standard linux file system and it cant compete with ext4.
    Is transparent compression the only saving grace of BTRFS?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mayankleoboy1 View Post
    I am disappointed by the stock performance of BTRFS. It has been said to be the next standard linux file system and it cant compete with ext4.
    Is transparent compression the only saving grace of BTRFS?
    Not sure if trolling...

    Default mount options are used. Besides, have you even looked at the features of btrfs?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fackamato View Post
    Not sure if trolling...

    Default mount options are used. Besides, have you even looked at the features of btrfs?
    Obviously not, if he thinks transparent compression is the only thing btrfs can do that other linux filesystems can't.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    110

    Default

    TBH I really would like seeing a MD-RAID0+BTRFS (and maybe MD-RAID+EXT4) <-> BTRFS-RAID0 comparison, and also the same for all other levels BTRFS currently supports (i.e. 1 and 10, with 5-6 in the pipeline IIRC).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    151

    Default Benchmarks with features

    Thanks for the update Michael on the BTRFS development. I can't wait to see her stretch her legs when she gets into the wild.

    I'd like to see more benchmarks with different features of btrfs and ext4 turned on (besides SSD mode). Not only does this provide me with information about btrfs features, but information on what I might be able to squeeze out of the file system in terms of performance for my hard disk. These types of articles, for me, are small guides on how to get my hardware to function at its best.

    I've learned a lot from your compiler/mesa optimizations. Could you extend this to your file systems benchmarks?

    ~Much appreciated!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Linux 3.3 Kernel: Btrfs vs. EXT4

    It's that time of the Linux kernel development cycle again... Here are benchmarks of the EXT4 and Btrfs file-systems with the soon-to-be-released Linux 3.3 kernel.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17111
    I'm very impressed with btrfs' performance.
    I can recall it being much slower than ext4 on pretty much every test, now, with stock butter, it is typically competitive.
    Presumably enabling compression would close the gap in every benchmark (obviously some more than others).
    So now, we need btrfs to have a file repair utility and online defrag for consumers.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    76

    Default

    Anyone seen any % of compression for the different algorithms with filesystem level compression? I've seen a bunch of performance benchmarks, but none of the includes how much space you save, and I'm on an SSD so I'd be quite interested in that

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by neuron View Post
    Anyone seen any % of compression for the different algorithms with filesystem level compression? I've seen a bunch of performance benchmarks, but none of the includes how much space you save, and I'm on an SSD so I'd be quite interested in that
    If you're using a sandforce controller then the controller is already performing compression.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    If you're using a sandforce controller then the controller is already performing compression.
    .. which is not visible to the filesystem, so compression still matters a lot.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •