Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Journaling file systems and latency?
From: Tommi Ilmonen (tilmonen_AT_cc.hut.fi)
Date: Fri Oct 12 2001 - 15:37:38 EEST
Hi.
The title had the question. To be more precise: Suppose I am going to
re-install a machine and get a journaling file system in at the time,
which file system should I use?
The file system should work with the low-latency patches by Andrew Morton.
Maximal performance (throughput) would be nice of course.
Available choices:
1) I recall that ReiserFS is addressed by the latency patches and one gets
reasonable (2-3 millisecond) latency with that. Apparently fairly
reliable. So it is promising.
2) Ext3 is based on ext2, so one might imagine that its latency behaviour
*might* be similar (=very good with the patches).
3) Then there is the JFS. Any information on that?
4) I am not very interested in SGI's XFS; it is not yet in the standard
kernel tree and I fear the kernel patches it requires might conflict with
the low-latency patches.
I found a few I/O benchmarks at:
http://www.osdlab.org/reports/journal_fs/
These imply that JFS and ext3 fare well almost always and XFS seems to
be slowish.
Tommi Ilmonen.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 15:38:36 EEST