I've been doing some ZFS on linux vs XFS benchmarking and I'm seeing that ZFS is performing slightly better than XFS on reads and writes but sucks on deletes. If you're not going to be doing lots of deletes and need the ability to expand (e.g. thinking of using LVM) then ZFS may be a nice alternative to XFS+LVM . ZFS also has built in compression, and so far with my benchmarks (using lzjb) with it turned, random, sequential reads and writes are slightly slower than the vs without compression and still a few seconds faster than XFS (which has no compression).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
|