Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
Bruce Cran
bruce at cran.org.uk
Sat Jan 8 16:52:00 UTC 2011
- Previous message: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
- Next message: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 06:12:38 -0800 (PST)
Paul Pathiakis <pathiaki2 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> The results came out like this:
>
> EXT3 - ~3000 tps
> EXT4 - ~3800 tps
> XFS - ~ 1800 tps
> ZFS - 75000 tps
ZFS seems very good at keeping the disk busy with lots of buffering - on
my machine gstat shows the disk at 100% for several seconds even after
the application has finished. Despite seeing iops go as high as 65k the
average seems not so impressive at around 15k, though it is only on a
single SATA drive.
--
Bruce Cran
- Previous message: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
- Next message: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
More information about the freebsd-performance
mailing list