Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Dec 2008 20:42 UTC, submitted by Michael
The choice of filesystems on Linux is vast, but most people will stick with their respective distributions' default choices, which will most likely be ext3, but you're free to use ReiserFS, XFS, or something else completely if you so desire. Things are about to change though, with btrfs just around the corner. To bridge the gap between now and btfrs, ext3 has been updated to ext4, which adds some interesting features like extents, which are already in use in most other popular file systems. Phoronix decided it was time to do some performance checking on ext4.
Thread beginning with comment 339339
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: I have several problems with this test...
by sbergman27 on Fri 5th Dec 2008 18:08
in reply to "I have several problems with this test..."
Member since:2005-07-24
I'd rather run benchmarks this way :
* a proper RAID array of say 6 or 8 500GB or bigger drives with a 3Ware or Areca controller;
* RAM sized to fit the CPU (1 or 2 GB per core)
* a proper RAID array of say 6 or 8 500GB or bigger drives with a 3Ware or Areca controller;
* RAM sized to fit the CPU (1 or 2 GB per core)
Yeah. They shoulda used hardware more like most people have instead of that 160GB disk and 2GB of memory.
Edited 2008-12-05 18:08 UTC
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-14
First, the hardware setup is pretty strange : they use an old single disk (160GB? are you really still using these?), big processor (dual quad core!) but very little RAM (2GB! for eight cores? that's ridiculous)... That's not a proper setup IMHO.
Then from the numbers, it looks like they didn't run bonnie++ several times and averaged it, but on a single run. However bonnie++ notoriously gives very variable results from run to run; you have to run it with very large file size and at least 8 times for a reliable average.
I'd rather run benchmarks this way :
* a proper RAID array of say 6 or 8 500GB or bigger drives with a 3Ware or Areca controller;
* RAM sized to fit the CPU (1 or 2 GB per core)
* 8 runs with a file size 8x RAM size.
Well I'll do it someday anyway