On Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 8:37 AM Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 12:59:37AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Two workloads: install and update. It might seem like an update is
> both read and write dependent, but the rpms are already compressed and
> don't get compressed again. The differences, I expect, are mostly
> write performance. And this suggests it's a wash. I'd say this setup
> is fairly middle of the pack.
> The space savings, however, isn't a wash.
And if I'm reading it right, a significant win for either btrfs setup over
Space wise or the update time? I think the install times are moderated by
the installer image being tightly bound by xz decompression. The same
happens to zstd compressed RPM for updates, to a lesser degree, and it
might be better threaded, so we see a bigger difference.
There is also noise contributed by the fact it's done in a VM, and using
sparse files. That could have disproportionately penalized ext4. But as a
sanity test that there isn't anything particular screwy going on
performance wise, it's probably fine.
For example, the kernel load times. Why is the compressed btrfs one so much
faster? Twice. Weird. All three setups, the kernel is on ext4. All six
should be the same. So there is error.