login
Header Space

 
 

Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: David Chinner <dgc@...>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Nathan Scott <nscott@...>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...>, Christoph Lameter <clameter@...>, Mel Gorman <mel@...>, <linux-fsdevel@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...>, William Lee Irwin III <wli@...>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...>, Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...>, Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...>, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...>, swin wang <wangswin@...>, <totty.lu@...>, <hugh@...>, <joern@...>
Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 - 9:01 am

On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 12:36 +1000, David Chinner wrote:

Grin, if the two were the same, there'd be no reason to write a new one.
I didn't expect faster writes on btrfs, at least not for workloads that
did not require reads.  The basic idea is to show there are a variety of
ways the larger blocks can improve (and hurt) performance.

Also, vmap isn't the only implementation path.  Its true the Btrfs
changes for this were huge, but a big chunk of the changes were for
different leaf/node blocksizes, something that may never get used in
practice.

-chris


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
More Large blocksize benchmarks, Chris Mason, (Mon Oct 15, 8:22 pm)
Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks, David Chinner, (Mon Oct 15, 10:36 pm)
Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks, Chris Mason, (Tue Oct 16, 9:01 am)
Re: More Large blocksize benchmarks, Christoph Lameter, (Mon Oct 15, 8:44 pm)
speck-geostationary