Johan Corveleyn said the following, on 22-04-14, 9:30 AM:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Florian Ludwig
> <vierzigundzwei_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> From your numbers I deduce that the performance degradation can be
>>> attributed partly to NTFS vs. ext4, and partly to Windows7 vs. Linux:
>>> * NTFS vs. ext4: roughly a factor 3 slower.
>>> * Windows 7 vs. Linux: roughly a factor 2.5 slower.
>>>
>>> You assume that the file operation performance of Windows on NTFS and Linux
>>> on NTFS is the same - which I am sure it is not. First of all the NTFS
>>> driver on Linux is FUSE-based so it runs in userspace and therefor slower
>>> than kernel based drivers such as ext4. Also ext4 is one of the most used
>>> file system on Linux so I expect its code to be much more optimized.
> Okay, I handwaved a bit too much. Maybe we should just take the
> Linux+NTFS numbers with a grain of salt then, and mainly focus on
> Linux+ext4 vs. Windows+NTFS. The fact remains that there are two
> variables changing. But maybe it's not a big issue for this
> comparison, and it's almost unavoidable.
>
And nfs as well, please (sorry for hijacking the thread).
Perfomance on nfs is just terrible (for all svn client versions).
Take any linux box, checkout to local fs and checkout to nfs vol: you
gonna be amazed.
The nfs thing should be a big deal, since build servers (jenkins and
other such) are severely impacted by this design.
--Roman
Received on 2014-04-25 03:41:32 CEST