Steve Rumble wrote:

> Without dirhash, on a FFSv2 filesystem with softdep and the same
> postmark settings as you, my laptop achieved 297 transactions/sec,
> 705kb/s reads and 1.30mb/sec writes. With dirhash this turns into
> 3846 transactions/sec, 8mb/sec writes and 15.1mb/sec reads. Your
> namei tweak to ufs_vsnops.c appeared to add a few hundred to the
> transactions/sec, .4mb/sec to read and 1mb/sec to write.

That's pretty good!

> However, with many more files (I quickly tried 100,000)
> performance degrades considerably.

Is this "performance is worse than without dirhash", or "performance is
still better than without dirhash, but just not has good"?

Like Matt, I have a large MH spam folder.  I usually empty it out when
it hits 100,000 messages because at that stage it overflows the 5 digit
message number field I have set up in my scan format.

Simon.
--
Simon Burge                            <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
NetBSD Support and Service:         http://www.wasabisystems.com/