AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20090403184323.7e47f651@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:mail.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<patrick.haverty@onstor.com>,<dl-Leopard@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@exch1.onstor.net/INBOX	0	102AB4F33EBBDB4C91915B145C8E9FB3127E51A323@exch1.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 18:43:44 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: Patrick Haverty <patrick.haverty@onstor.com>
Cc: dl-Leopard <dl-Leopard@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: So what are all those CPUs good for?
Message-ID: <20090403184344.0d1441bd@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <102AB4F33EBBDB4C91915B145C8E9FB3127E51A323@exch1.onstor.net>
References: <102AB4F33EBBDB4C91915B145C8E9FB3127E51A323@exch1.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 14:16:03 -0700 Patrick Haverty
<patrick.haverty@onstor.com> wrote:

> Compression?
> 
> I finally had a chance to compare CPU usage from a filesystem (folder) with compression turned on to one without.  In the test I used four clients each running dd, 128k block size and 64 GB file size.  When writing the Leopards CPU utilization % is around 12% without compression and around 16% with compression.  When reading it is 16% without and 25% with.  More interesting is that write throughput went from 215 MB/s to 398 MB/s, and read performance went from 198 MB/s to 426 MB/s (more or less saturating the four GbE links).
> 
> Pat


Hey don't look at me, I said we should use the R805 dual-dual machine,
which had the best results anyway ~:^)  Maybe before we ship each
leopard, we can pull one of the quad cores and put it in a jewel box
and the customer can use it as a key chain!

Try the test with a directory full of JPEGs or already compressed files.
Should be interesting.