File systems performance

[Jerry Feldman]

I was in Houston for an HP/Intel Developer forum and was asked about file 
system performance. This was from a guy at a company who has a database 
product, and is interested in performance and not journaling. My top of the 
head answer was that ext2 would probably be the best because it does not 
have the journaling overhead, but I later checked some benchmarks, and 
found that ext2 did not always give the best performance.  My advice to him 
was to run their own benchmarks since they were more familiar with their 
product and the data metrics. What I'm looking for here is possibly some 
data you might have accumulated. 

(BTW: a number of the benchmarks show ext3 reasonably slow in comparison to 
JFS, ReiserFS, and XFS). 
-- 
Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9