Re: Phoronix article slaming BTRFS
Mike Ramsey wrote (ao): Depends on who you talk to. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ocz-ssd-vertex-intel-solid-state,7127.html OCZ Says Its New Vertex SSD Beats Intel's X25-E I am not taking sides. I am just saying that the SSD market is fluid. Read and write speeds specs mean (almost) nothing when it comes to SSD. The true performance is shown in heavy long-running benchmarks. OCZ has a long history of very bad performing SSD products. The Intel SSD did set the standard since it came on the market (hence the reason OCZ mentions the X25-E). Btw, not only benchmarks show paper specs mean (almost) nothing: check the OCZ forums and google on real life usage performance problems (stutters mostly) under normal to low load. Especially small writes kill OCZ SSD performance, although their products have improved with the last releases. With kind regards, Sander -- Humilis IT Services and Solutions http://www.humilis.net -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Phoronix article slaming BTRFS
On Wed, Jun 24 2009, Mike Ramsey wrote: Stephan von Krawczynski skraw at ithnet.com writes: [snip] Can someone explain to a quite naive person like me why one should be interested in SSDs that perform worse than Intel? Why shouldn't I just buy the best-performing product? This is a moving market, and it is obvious that the bad performers will be left behind... If you really care to fiddle with ssd options then use a real bad hw for testing the performance - take an ide interface and connect a CF card. This is a common setup for embedded usage and frequently used. Everything in between CF and Intel will just be dead before your fs options will become really stable. So why loose time with it? Depends on who you talk to. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ocz-ssd-vertex-intel-solid-state,7127.html OCZ Says Its New Vertex SSD Beats Intel's X25-E Heh, the Vertex beating the X25-E? I think such a statement could only come from OCZ. No amount of magic will suddenly make MLC beat SLC, let alone a well tuned firmware like the X25-E's. I'm sure they concocted some synthetic benchmark where the Vertex has some slight edge. In the real world, the X25-E wipes the floor with the Vertex. The Vertex is indeed a good performer, in its price range it's currently the one to beat. I have doubts about the maturity of the product though, looks mostly like a live beta being tested in the field. So I'd just be careful with what kind of use they are put to. But just running tests on the drive does show that it performs well for most things. -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Phoronix article slaming BTRFS
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:47 +, Mike Ramsey mikejram...@comcast.net wrote: Wil Reichert wil.reichert at gmail.com writes: My suggestion is either to show where their benchmarks are in err, I did this, didn't I? 1. Vertex with write cache enabled; disabled would have seen a 2X improvement. 2. Error in libata Meaning that nobody can turn off the write cache in linux without deep kernel hackery. Sounds to me like they are benchmarking the real world rather than trying to favour btrfs by making changes that are unlikely to be viable for anyone trying to run it in production. I.e. they're benchmarking reality. Sure there are ways that btrfs performance could be improved, but they're not realistically available to mortals selecting use btrfs for /home in their Ubuntu Bleeding-Edge Badger release. Bron. -- Bron Gondwana br...@fastmail.fm -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Phoronix article slaming BTRFS
Bron Gondwana brong at fastmail.fm writes: On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:47 +, Mike Ramsey MikeJRamsey at comcast.net wrote: Wil Reichert wil.reichert at gmail.com writes: My suggestion is either to show where their benchmarks are in err, I did this, didn't I? 1. Vertex with write cache enabled; disabled would have seen a 2X improvement. 2. Error in libata Meaning that nobody can turn off the write cache in linux without deep kernel hackery. I would say this differently. Meaning that nobody can turn off the write cache in linux without applying the known fixes to libata. Sounds to me like they are benchmarking the real world rather than trying to favour btrfs by making changes that are unlikely to be viable for anyone trying to run it in production. I.e. they're benchmarking reality. Real world is running kernel software that is compatible with the unit under test. Benchmarking Butters with a broken kernel is not real world; it's unfair. Sure there are ways that btrfs performance could be improved, but they're not realistically available to mortals selecting use btrfs for /home in their Ubuntu Bleeding-Edge Badger release. Butters is experimental. Currently, it should only be used under adult supervision. I am looking forward to the day that Butters can be used by novices when they click http://www.ubuntu.com/products/GetUbuntu/download Bron. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Phoronix article slaming BTRFS
Jens Axboe jens.axboe at oracle.com writes: On Wed, Jun 24 2009, Mike Ramsey wrote: Stephan von Krawczynski skraw at ithnet.com writes: [snip] Depends on who you talk to. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ocz-ssd-vertex-intel-solid-state,7127.html OCZ Says Its New Vertex SSD Beats Intel's X25-E Heh, the Vertex beating the X25-E? I think such a statement could only come from OCZ. No amount of magic will suddenly make MLC beat SLC, let alone a well tuned firmware like the X25-E's. I'm sure they concocted some synthetic benchmark where the Vertex has some slight edge. In the real world, the X25-E wipes the floor with the Vertex. The Vertex is indeed a good performer, in its price range it's currently the one to beat. I have doubts about the maturity of the product though, looks mostly like a live beta being tested in the field. So I'd just be careful with what kind of use they are put to. But just running tests on the drive does show that it performs well for most things. If I was buying for business than the Intel drives would be my choice. They are clearly the quality leader. For instance, Intel has tweaked their firmware to optimize for small IOs. The X25-E and X25-M are class. We agree here I think. For home use where it is *my* money I am willing to have a little faith in order to save a couple hundred dollars. I realize that OCZ and its controller supplier will be shipping firmware updates. But don't kid yourself, so is Intel. BTW, what OCZ did to increase speed was to increase the cache size in their large capacity high end Vertex models. This wouldn't help my 30 GB model. Mike Ramsey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Read errors while benchmarking
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote: Currently, btrfs doesn't support using direct I/O for read. Is anyone working on this? It /is/ a rather basic feature, and testing with iozone would be nice. Yes, I am working on it. I will be away for the next 10 days but hope to have something for read tests soon after. jim -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
