[linux-audio-user] XFS on FC2; experiences, pointers?

Jack O'Quin joq at io.com
Thu Jan 20 15:16:31 EST 2005


Florin Andrei <florin at andrei.myip.org> writes:

> On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 10:40 -0500, Rick B wrote:
>
>>  From what I've read XFS main strong point is *reading* data from the 
>> disk faster than other FSs', especially as it pertains to large video 
>> files. But when it comes to writing and deleting, its performance is 
>> worse than other FSes. I've personally tried it and it didn't seem any 
>> faster than ReiserFS.
>
> Actually, XFS is very fast at deleting very large files. I know, i do
> DVD authoring all the time, Ext3 is simply ludicrous when deleting a lot
> of very large project files, you have to wait and wait and wait... With
> XFS, even a 50GB project gets deleted instantaneously.
>
> Also, when writing real fast to really big files (think: video capture)
> pretty much nothing beats XFS.

How is its low-latency realtime behavior?

In recent tests of his experimental isochronous scheduler, Con Kolivas
uncovered a periodic 6msec scheduling delay every 20 seconds while
running reiserfs with logging enabled...

  http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/SCHED_ISO/iso2-benchmarks/jack_test3-2.6.11-rc1-iso2-40clients.png

Without logging it ran much better...

  http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/SCHED_ISO/iso2-benchmarks/jack_test3-iso2-40c-nolog.png 

I'd love to see some similar tests using XFS.  We should probably
collect audio performance data on all the available filesystems.
-- 
  joq



More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list