Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 01:04:58 +0200 From: Simon Barner <barner@gmx.de> To: Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@withagen.nl> Cc: "freebsd-ports@freebsd.org" <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: runtime errors with iozone21 Message-ID: <20041003230458.GC25654@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de> In-Reply-To: <41607F34.60900@withagen.nl> References: <41607F34.60900@withagen.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--0vzXIDBeUiKkjNJl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Maintainer is 'ports@FreeBSD.org', which means more or less that nobody= =20 > feels responsable for it. I've looked under the hood, but at first sight= =20 > it seem because the timing functions cannot keep upt with the fast=20 > return of the read call and time seems to be zero. > Now this requires a serious overhaul of iozone21 to get a more accurate= =20 > timing. >=20 > Would it not be better to just retire this port?? > Especially zince there is a better version of iozone! Hi, the reason why there a two versions of iozone can be found in iozone21's pkg-descr: [...] This is the 2.1 version of iozone. The new 3.x+ versions of iozone have completely changed their testing methods, thus their output is useless in comparing with older statistics. [...] Of course, this message was added Sun Jan 9 22:51:21 2000 UTC, so maybe your idea of retiring the port is still right. Simon --0vzXIDBeUiKkjNJl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBYIWaCkn+/eutqCoRArVgAKCCOUjYFI5CnWLsLnm23CTz6oDoWACfaKUT Mgq5J9620mcckuo+2RGXzKY= =nhW1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0vzXIDBeUiKkjNJl--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041003230458.GC25654>