From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751601AbbD2TFg (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 29 Apr 2015 15:05:36 -0400
Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com ([209.85.212.182]:38443 "EHLO
	mail-wi0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751360AbbD2TFa (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 29 Apr 2015 15:05:30 -0400
Message-ID: <1430334326.7360.25.camel@gmail.com>
Subject: xfs: does mkfs.xfs require fancy switches to get decent
 performance? (was Tux3 Report: How fast can we fsync?)
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Phillips <daniel@phunq.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tux3@tux3.org,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
        OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:05:26 +0200
In-Reply-To: <1430325763.19371.41.camel@gmail.com>
References: <8f886f13-6550-4322-95be-93244ae61045@phunq.net>
	 <1430274071.3363.4.camel@gmail.com>
	 <1906f271-aa23-404b-9776-a4e2bce0c6aa@phunq.net>
	 <1430289213.3693.3.camel@gmail.com>
	 <b10acd39-85d6-44f8-bbad-ac393bd8504e@phunq.net>
	 <1430325763.19371.41.camel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Here's something that _might_ interest xfs folks.

cd git (source repository of git itself)
make clean
echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
time make -j8 test

ext4    2m20.721s
xfs     6m41.887s <-- ick
btrfs   1m32.038s
tux3    1m30.262s

Testing by Aunt Tilly: mkfs, no fancy switches, mount the thing, test.

Are defaults for mkfs.xfs such that nobody sane uses them, or does xfs
really hate whatever git selftests are doing this much?

	-Mike