Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:36:30 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> To: Mike Jakubik <mikej@rogers.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Journaling UFS with gjournal. Message-ID: <20060620193630.GA8007@garage.freebsd.pl> In-Reply-To: <44984A91.8040805@rogers.com> References: <20060619131101.GD1130@garage.freebsd.pl> <44984A91.8040805@rogers.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 03:20:49PM -0400, Mike Jakubik wrote: +> Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: +> >Copying one large file: +> >UFS: 8s +> >UFS+SU: 8s +> >gjournal(1): 16s +> >gjournal(2): 14s +> > +> >Copying eight large files in parallel: +> >UFS: 120s +> >UFS+SU: 120s +> >gjournal(1): 184s +> >gjournal(2): 165s +> > +> >Untaring eight src.tgz in parallel: +> >UFS: 791s +> >UFS+SU: 650s +> >gjournal(1): 333s +> >gjournal(2): 309s +> > +> >Reading. grep -r on two src/ directories in parallel: +> >UFS: 84s +> >UFS+SU: 138s +> >gjournal(1): 102s +> >gjournal(2): 89s +> > +> +> Not to sound ungrateful for the work, which i am, this is great! But the performance impact seems rather large to me. Does the presence of journaling mean that we could +> perhaps mount the filesystems async? Does it eliminate the need for softupdates? The performance impact is big for large files, because in theory we have to write the data twice. Yes, it eliminates need for SU, but there are reasons, that you still want to use SU, eg. for snapshots. -- Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEmE4+ForvXbEpPzQRAjSQAJ0e6afsrswjGwoJhPut8ECFSwWpwwCgp+gl dEU8PUrMPRznRZEOSYn1v5g= =NVNr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060620193630.GA8007>