sd performance tests, bonnie++ with different filesystems.

Gennady Kupava gb at
Sat Jun 26 11:02:26 CEST 2010

Hi, list.

>It's good to see someone doing tests on this, but more info is needed
on what fs creation and mount options were applied by default.

all fses were created with default options, you can check published
script, which has mkfses line-by-line.

> Of particular interest would be whether btrfs used the 
ssd option by default.

i'll do next run with both ssd and non-ssd versions of btrfs.

> and how the compress option would affect the results - 
does the cpu overhead of compression outweigh the reduction of bus traffic 
between cpu and glamo?

hm, from my POV it depends now much it loads CPU, hm... need to add this on next run.

Al, thanks for suggestions, next run is not priority for me, as i already choosen filesystems for 
my freerunner, but a bit later i'll do it, as a minimum to check your suggestions about btrfs.

>Is it possible to tune these file systems to achieve better results?

If someone has suggestions about other filesystems, they are welcome. Sure, it's possible, but i didn't 
want to spend a week studiing all kinds of options for all kind of filesystems just to repartition my sd, 
just wanted to choose fs intelligently :)
but topic is interesting in general (we all have USB flashes not only sd in moko).

>What does "% CPU" field name stands for? Is it CPU load or idle?

this is standard table for bonnie++, it stands for cpu load of course.

>Interesting how bad results you got for brtfs (I guess that MeeGo people
also did some benchmarks, before selecting is as default fs). Maybe
because rather slow cpu in freerunner?

i didn't bury in detatils, to answer this question it's better try first to optimize btrfs. 
but all i read about btrfs were some bad details, like this
it's strange to choose something experimental, in development fs with unstable disk format for production system,
also it's entirely possible that MeeGo people choose it because 'it's cool', 'it's cool for target audience',
 "our devs participate in btrfs development and they say ...", or something like this. also, by guess is that 
btrfs is more complex than others. anyway using significatly more cpu is bad for embedded, as it eats more power.


More information about the community mailing list