[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 0/3] ocfs2: Inode Allocation Strategy Improvement.v2

[Tao Ma]

tristan.ye wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 16:16 +0800, Tao Ma wrote:
>   
>> tristan.ye wrote:
>>
> Tao,
>
> I've done 10 times tests with single-node testcase repeatly, following
> is a average statistic reports
> =============== Tests with 10 times iteration================ 
>
> 1st 'Tar xjvf' result:
>
> Average real time with 10 times: 
> Original kernel                            kernel with enhanced patches
>  0m 43.578s                                       0m 49.355s
>
> 1st 'ls -lR' result:
> Average real time with 10 times: 
> Original kernel                            kernel with enhanced patches
>  0m 23.622s                                        0m 23.508s
>
> 1st 'rm -rf' result:
> Average real time with 10 times: 
> Original kernel                            kernel with enhanced patches
>  0m 57.039s                                       0m 58.612s
>
> 2rd 'Tar xjvf' result:
> Average real time with 10 times: 
> Original kernel                            kernel with enhanced patches
>  0m 49.550s                                       0m 52.214s
>
> 2rd 'ls -lR' result:
> Average real time with 10 times: 
> Original kernel                            kernel with enhanced patches
>
> 0m 23.591s                                       0m 23.487s
>
> ===============Tests end============================ 
>
>
> >From above tests, we really have had a speed-up performance gain when
> traversing files  by 'ls -lR' against a kernel tree:),but seems also
> encountered a performance lose when populating the files by 'tar xvjf'
> according to the contrast tests.
>   
I am just a little confused with your test result. Especially the last one.
from the statistics, it looks that there is almost no performance gain 
comparing 0m23.591s with 0m 23.487s.
But I see >2mins every time. So are you sure of it?
anyway, thanks for your test and I will discuss it with you later.

Regards,
Tao