Re: Filesystem benchmarks: ext2 vs ext3 vs jfs vs minix

Matthew Kirkwood (
Thu, 28 Mar 2002 00:09:38 +0000 (GMT)

On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Andreas Dilger wrote:

> If the I/O is normally sync driven, you should consider testing ext3
> with "data=journal". While this seems counterintuitive because it is
> writing the data to disk twice, it can often be faster in real-world
> "bursty" environments because the sync I/O goes to the journal in one
> contiguous write, and it can then be written to the rest of the fs
> asynchronously safely.

Good point (and partially borne out by my new numbers).

> You can also set up an external journal device so that the journal is
> on another disk and avoid seeking between the journal and the rest of
> the filesystem.

Good idea. If I had only a disks - a slow one and a fast one,
how should they be configured? (Or might this be another area
worthy of testing? The tradeoffs can go both ways -- the slow
disk might seem better for the async writes, but it'll also be
worse at seeking, so perhaps might be more appropriate for the
journal disk?)


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at