Preliminary performance results

[Pradeep P. <pp...@ee...>]

Hi,
    I have run a very basic read/write test, and the comparison between 
ext2 and LFS is at http://logfs.sourceforg.net/perf.html. I have 
disabled segusage table maintainance as it was causing Oops. One thing 
to note that with bigger segment size, the write performance is closer 
to ext2 performance. Note that the scales are a little different for the 
different segment size graphs. I am still meddling with OOo to bring all 
the graphs to the same scale.
    The reasons for poor performance, I think is due to the lock 
contention. Right now, locking is coarse-grained and needs to be refined.
    Don't read too much into the graphs though. I was just happy to see 
LFS not crash during these tests :-) I have also tried IOZone, but the 
results are quite random and an strace revealed that it's doing a lot of 
things, and LFS is not yet ready for the heavy iron.
    The script used for testing is lfsprogs/bench.pl. I have got 
Justin's (Author of benchmarking article 
http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.html) script, and will be doing more 
tests with that.

Cheers,
-- 
Pradeep Padala
http://ppadala.blogspot.com