1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking.org

Real World Benchmarks Of The EXT4 File-System

Michael Larabel

Published on 3 December 2008
Written by Michael Larabel
Page 1 of 9 - 100 Comments

With the EXT4 file-system being marked as stable in the forthcoming Linux 2.6.28 kernel, and some Linux distributions potentially switching to it as an interim step until the btrfs file-system is ready, we decided it was time to benchmark this journaled file-system for ourselves. We ran a number of disk-centric Linux benchmarks along with several of our real-world tests from the Phoronix Test Suite to gauge how well the EXT4 file-system performance will be noticed by desktop users and computer gamers. We have compared these EXT4 results to the EXT3, XFS, and ReiserFS file-systems.

For those that have yet to read about the EXT4 file-system, it has several advantages over its predecessor, EXT3, but it's more along the lines of just an update and not a complete overhaul. In fact, EXT4 is both forward and backwards compatible with EXT3. One of the major differences between EXT4 and EXT3 (and EXT2 for that matter) is the introduction of Extents. The Extents feature replaces block mapping, which is designed to improve performance with the creation of larger files, and will reduce fragmentation on the hard disk. Extents are similarly used within Reiser4, XFS, and Apple's HFS+. Some of the other features for EXT4 include delayed allocation, persistent pre-allocation, and journal check summing. The EXT4 file-system supports partition sizes up to 1 Exabyte and up to 640,000 sub-directories per directory.

While the EXT4 file-system was marked as "ext4dev" within the kernel to signify its development status, Red Hat has been shipping EXT4 as an install-time option since Fedora 9. This support has continued into Fedora 10 with the newest kernel components. When installing Fedora, to create an EXT4 file-system you must append "ext4" to the boot line when starting the Anaconda installer. Beyond the Fedora option, EXT4 has yet to find itself as an option in many distribution installers.

For our testing we had compared the performance of the EXT3, EXT4, XFS, and ReiserFS file-systems. We had done standard installs of Fedora 10 x86_64 and each time we went without using a Logical Volume Manager and the SWAP size was constant at 4GB. Fedora 10 was reinstalled each time and we had just changed the default / file-system to what was being tested and let that occupy the remaining disk space. All file-systems were left with their defaults, which does include the use of Extents on EXT4. Fedora 10 was left at its defaults except for disabling SELinux. The Serial ATA hard drive was using AHCI mode.

Our test system was made up of dual Intel Xeon E5320 Quad-Core "Clovertown" processors, Tyan Tempest i5400XT motherboard, 2GB of Kingston DDR2 FB-DIMM RAM, a 160GB Western Digital WD1600YS-01SHB1 hard drive, and a ASUS GeForce 9600GT 512MB graphics card. Recapping the software defaults in Fedora 10 x86_64 is the Linux 2.6.27 kernel, X Server 1.5.3, GNOME 2.24.1, GCC 4.3.2, and IcedTea 1.3.1. The NVIDIA driver we were using for the GeForce 9600GT was NVIDIA 180.08.

To automate all of our benchmarking we had used Phoronix Test Suite 1.6.0 Alpha 2. The real-world tests we carried out within there was Nexuiz, World of Padman, Unreal Tournament 2004, 7-Zip compression, Parallel BZIP2 compression, LZMA compression, LAME MP3 encoding, FFmpeg encoding, GnuPG file encryption, OpenSSL, and Bork File Encrypter. The pure disk tests we were using from the Phoronix Test Suite included Bonnie++, IOzone, and Flexible IO Tester. On the following pages are our EXT4 benchmarking results starting with the disk tests and proceeding to the real-world Linux EXT4 benchmarks.

Message From Actualtests: Pass the BH0-006 exam to become master of latest technology using our up to date JN0-522 study guide and 642-611 training products.

Interested in E20-001 certification? Subscribe for online pass4sure 70-433 tutorials and 000-104 prep guides to get an easy access to your success.

<< Previous Page
1
Latest Linux Hardware Reviews
  1. AMD Launches New FX CPUs, Cuts Prices On Existing Processors
  2. Preview: AMD's FX-9590 Eight-Core At Up To 5.0GHz On Linux
  3. Intel Launches The Core i7 5960X, Mighty Powerful Haswell-E CPUs
  4. AMD Radeon R9 290: Gallium3D vs. Catalyst Drivers
Latest Linux Articles
  1. LLVM Clang 3.5 Brings Some Compiler Performance Improvements
  2. Ondemand vs. Performance CPU Governing For AMD FX CPUs On Linux 3.17
  3. How Intel Graphics On Linux Compare To Open-Source AMD/NVIDIA Drivers
  4. The Fastest NVIDIA GPUs For Open-Source Nouveau With Steam Linux Gaming
Latest Linux News
  1. POCL Is Maturing Well For Running OpenCL On The CPU
  2. New Group Calls For Boycotting Systemd
  3. The Features To Find With The Imminent Release Of LLVM/Clang 3.5
  4. Borderlands 2 Is Coming To Linux
  5. The Witcher 2 Ups The Performance More & Works Around Catalyst Bug
  6. Running Gallium3D's LLVMpipe On The Eight-Core 5GHz CPU
  7. Trying Intel OpenCL On Linux For Video Encoding
  8. GSoC 2014 Yielded Some Improvements For Mesa/X.Org This Year
  9. webOS Lives On As LuneOS With New Release
  10. Marek Lands Radeon Gallium3D HyperZ Improvements
Latest Forum Discussions
  1. Lennart Poettering Talks Up His New Linux Vision That Involves Btrfs
  2. nv and xorg.conf under Debian PPC
  3. AMD graphics doesn't work with AMD Catalyst drivers
  4. Best Radeon for a Power Mac G5?
  5. The dangers of Linux kernel development
  6. Updated and Optimized Ubuntu Free Graphics Drivers
  7. AMD Releases UVD Video Decode Support For R600 GPUs
  8. SSD seems slow