ZFS ZFS compression performance lz4 vs zstd

With FreeBSD 14.0 zstd also has the early abort feature and seems an alternative for lz4. The higher compression of zstd seems interesting, yet it comes at a cost of more required cpu performance. As I have a low-end cpu (3.5Ghz Pentium G4560) I wondering how lz4 and zstd compare.

So my question, how can I benchmark lz4 vs zstd (at various compression levels) on my server?

And whilst we're here, can zstd be chosen during install for the root disk?
 
As I have a low-end cpu (3.5Ghz Pentium G4560) I wondering how lz4 and zstd compare.
Its not that low end, I use zstd on Intel N2807 2.5W while Pentium G4560 is a regular 54W desktop CPU.
So my question, how can I benchmark lz4 vs zstd (at various compression levels) on my server?
Create ZFS dataset with zstd compression, then create ZFS dataset with lz4 compression, load them with your data and compare compressratio for both.
And whilst we're here, can zstd be chosen during install for the root disk?
No, and the default is lz4.
 
Its not that low end, I use zstd on Intel N2807 2.5W while Pentium G4560 is a regular 54W desktop CPU.
Ah, that's good to know
Create ZFS dataset with zstd compression, then create ZFS dataset with lz4 compression, load them with your data and compare compressratio for both.
Clear, but how to I measure throughput, not only sequential but also random?
No, and the default is lz4.
Clear
 
Benchmarking compressed filesystems is a bit of effort. You want to test with high compressible data (e.g. /usr/src), hard to compress data (?), uncompressible data (encrypted files, media files).
 
Ah yes, bonnie, how could I have forgotten that one.

And it's for my simple homeserver. So the data and their compressibility varies, eg pictures, code repos, pdf, timemachien backups etc. So I'll just test on part of the set
 
Back
Top