Btrfs users - Feb 2008 - btrfs v0.11 & btrfs v0.12 benchmark results

Hi,

I've recently benchmarked btrfs v0.11 & v0.12 against ext2, ext3, ext4,
jfs, reiserfs and xfs.

OS: Ubuntu Hardy
Kernel: 2.6.24(-5-server)

Hardware:
---------

Fu-Si Primergy RX330 S1

      * AMD Opteron 2210 1.8 GHz
      * 1 GB RAM
      * 3 x 73 GB, 3Gb/s, hot plug, 10k rpm, 3.5" SAS HDD
      * LSI RAID 128 MB

Fu-Si Econel 200

      * Intel Xeon 5110
      * 512 MB RAM
      * 2 x 160 GB SATA HDD

Summary, graphs, etc.:
----------------------

tiobench:

http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/tiobench.ods

bonnie++: 

http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/bonnieplusplus.ods

dbench:

http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/dbench.ods


Test outputs:
-------------

Fu-Si Econel 200 - btrfs v0.11
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/btrfs_v0.11__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - btrfs v0.11
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/btrfs_v0.11__rx330_log.txt

Fu-Si Econel 200 - btrfs v0.12
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/btrfs_v0.12__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - btrfs v0.12
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/btrfs_v0.12__rx330_log.txt

Fu-Si Econel 200 - ext2
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/ext2__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - ext2
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/ext2__rx330_log.txt

Fu-Si Econel 200 - ext3
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/ext3__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - ext3
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/ext3__rx330_log.txt

Fu-Si Econel 200 - ext4
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/ext4__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - ext4
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/ext4__rx330_log.txt

Fu-Si Econel 200 - ext4 writeback
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/ext4_writeback__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - ext4 writeback
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/ext4_writeback__rx330_log.txt

Fu-Si Econel 200 - jfs
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/jfs__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - jfs
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/jfs__rx330_log.txt

Fu-Si Econel 200 - reiserfs
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/reiserfs__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - reiserfs
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/reiserfs__rx330_log.txt

Fu-Si Econel 200 - xfs
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/xfs__eco200_log.txt

Fu-Si RX330 - xfs
http://hup.hu/old/HUP/FS_test_2008/meresek/xfs__rx330_log.txt


-- 
Gabor MICSKO - http://hup.hu

On Thursday 14 February 2008, Gabor MICSKO wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've recently benchmarked btrfs v0.11 & v0.12 against ext2, ext3,
ext4,
> jfs, reiserfs and xfs.
Interesting, at least here I see pretty much the same speeds for all the 
filesystems on sequential IO.  But, I'll test again with more spindles.

Could I trouble you to run one more btrfs run?  Please mount v0.12 with -o 
nodatasum

-chris

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 08:49 -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Friday 15 February 2008, Gabor MICSKO wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 19:54 -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > On Thursday 14 February 2008, Gabor MICSKO wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I've recently benchmarked btrfs v0.11 & v0.12
against ext2, ext3, ext4,
> > > > jfs, reiserfs and xfs.
> > >
> > > Interesting, at least here I see pretty much the same speeds for
all the
> > > filesystems on sequential IO.  But, I'll test again with more
spindles.
> > >
> > > Could I trouble you to run one more btrfs run?  Please mount
v0.12 with
> > > -o nodatasum
> >
> > Unfortunately these test boxes are not available anymore for me to
> > conduct further tests, but i plan to prepare even more btrfs related
> > tests in the future.
> 
> Ok, I'll try to reproduce your results on some machines here.  I see
both
> machines had more than one spindle, how were the drives configured?
(striped,
> mirrored, raid?)
> 
> -chris
I've created two "simple as possible" test environments: 

Fu-Si Primergy RX330 with 3 SAS drives:
---------------------------------------

- drive0 \
            HW RAID1 - /dev/sda1  - root fs, /dev/sda2 - swap
- drive1 /

- drive2 - /dev/sdb1

During tests i used /dev/sdb1 (~ 70GB) for btrfs, ext2, etc.
filesystems. 

For example: 

mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb1
mount /dev/sdb1 /data


Fu-Si Econel 200 with 2 SATA drives:
------------------------------------

- drive0 - /dev/sda1 - root fs, /dev/sda2 - swap

- drive1 - /dev/sdb1 

During tests i used /dev/sdb1 (~ 160GB) for btrfs, ext2, etc.
filesystems. 

For example: 

mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb1
mount /dev/sdb1 /data

Principles followed under the tests:

- single user mode
- echo "3" > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
- cron, etc. disabled
- before each tests i've created filesystems from scratch using default
options:

e.g.: 

umount /data
mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb1
mount /dev/sdb1 /data
sync
sleep 10 
tiobench --dir /data --size 2048 --threads 2 --block 4096

- all filesystems were mounted using default mount options except in
"ext4 wb" tests where i used:

mount /dev/sdb1 /data -t ext4dev -o extents -o data=writeback

- all tests were run 3 times and the average was taken

Tests:

1.) tiobench --dir /data --size 2048 --threads 2 --block 4096
2.) tiobench --dir /data --size 2048 --threads 2 --block 16384
3.) bonnie++ -d /data -u root -s 2048 -m {btrfs, ext2, ex3, ...}
4.) dbench -D /data -t 60 50

Regards,

-- 
Gabor MICSKO - http://hup.hu