This screenshot is the only metric where btrfs is incredibly slow.
Bcachefs random and sequential writes and reads are much slower than other filesystems in this benchmark.
I have no idea how the actual real world performance will be. Bcachefs still misses a lot of features so I’ll continue to follow the development, hopefully including performance improvements.
Bcachefs sequential write performance in this out-of-the-box comparison was coming in at around half the speed of Btrfs while XFS, F2FS, and EXT4 were the fastest.
Wait, so the benchmarks mostly contradict claims that bcachefs is almost as fast as ext4 except in application startup time? What kind of test performed for that application startup time benchmark?
I think it’s not btrfs that’s slow, it’s bcachefs that’s insanely fast. Bcachefs almost as fast as ext4 while having that many features is insane.
This screenshot is the only metric where btrfs is incredibly slow.
Bcachefs random and sequential writes and reads are much slower than other filesystems in this benchmark.
I have no idea how the actual real world performance will be. Bcachefs still misses a lot of features so I’ll continue to follow the development, hopefully including performance improvements.
https://www.phoronix.com/review/bcachefs-linux-67/2
Edit: The benchmarks were done with a debug variable set, which explains the weak IO.
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Bcachefs-Updated-Linux-6.7
Wait, so the benchmarks mostly contradict claims that bcachefs is almost as fast as ext4 except in application startup time? What kind of test performed for that application startup time benchmark?
deleted by creator
Interesting, that hopefully explains the weak IO troughput. Thank you.
The application startup test is designed to cold-load an application with heavy background IO going on.