morrowind@lemmy.ml to Linux@lemmy.mlEnglish · 2 年前Trying Out & Benchmarking Bcachefs On Linux 6.7www.phoronix.comexternal-linkmessage-square10linkfedilinkarrow-up151arrow-down14cross-posted to: linux@lemmy.world
arrow-up147arrow-down1external-linkTrying Out & Benchmarking Bcachefs On Linux 6.7www.phoronix.commorrowind@lemmy.ml to Linux@lemmy.mlEnglish · 2 年前message-square10linkfedilinkcross-posted to: linux@lemmy.world
minus-squaremorrowind@lemmy.mlOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·2 年前That startup time test seems a little sus for BTRFS
minus-squareProtonBadger@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up4·edit-22 年前Yes, it seems like there could be a weakness there, unless it’s just a fluke. The test has a background I/O load designed to stress BFQ I/O.
minus-squareChewy@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 年前Yes, I’m surprised it is so bad considering btrfs was close to the other fs on most benchmarks.
minus-squarepiexil@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·2 年前It’s not just startup time, it’s startup time with heavy background I/O
That startup time test seems a little sus for BTRFS
Yes, it seems like there could be a weakness there, unless it’s just a fluke. The test has a background I/O load designed to stress BFQ I/O.
Yes, I’m surprised it is so bad considering btrfs was close to the other fs on most benchmarks.
It’s not just startup time, it’s startup time with heavy background I/O
Very much so.