For those of you wondering the performance impact of using mount options for tuning the
Btrfs file-system on the soon-to-be-out
Linux 3.9 kernel, here's some benchmarks of common Btrfs mount options.
There were
Btrfs tuning benchmarks on the Linux 3.7 kernel offered on Phoronix, but with this next-generation Linux file-system still being in a state of flux, new benchmarks were conducted this week from a Linux 3.9 Git kernel.
Already from the Linux 3.9 kernel have been
an HDD and SSD file-system comparison. The HDD/SSD comparison not only included Btrfs but also EXT4, XFS, and F2FS. That article is worth checking out!
Being posted tonight now are just new Btrfs benchmarks in a standalone solid-state drive configuration when cleanly formatting the Btrfs file-system each time and mounting it with some common options. For documentation on the Btrfs mount options and their meaning, see the
Btrfs Kernel.org Wiki.
Here's the system used for this brief testing:
The benchmark results in full for this testing can be
found on OpenBenchmarking.org.
The transparent Btrfs file-system compression with ZLIB and LZO methods continue to do very well in these benchmarks, though in some of these tests, the sample data is very compression-friendly compared to movies, images, and other common real-world data.
The
nodatacow mount option for not doing copy-on-write with new files can also enhance performance, but is unsafe as it also turns off file-system checksumming so it can be bad if the system is unreliable or is not battery-backed.
The results aren't a big surprise compared to other recent Linux kernel file-system tests from solid-state storage.
Continue on to
1304117-UT-BTRFSUBUN11 for the rest of these Btrfs Linux 3.9 file-system performance results.
