Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 16:34:09 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <dyson@iquest.net> To: dg@root.com Cc: grog@lemis.com, jm7996@devrycols.edu, kheuer@gwdu60.gwdg.de, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD - A User's Point of View Message-ID: <199901262134.QAA01210@y.dyson.net> In-Reply-To: <199901240949.BAA17434@implode.root.com> from David Greenman at "Jan 24, 99 01:49:14 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Greenman said: > > Actually, prior to softupdates, FreeBSD's filesystem performance wasn't > very good compared to ext2fs for the very reason that ext2fs is "fast and > loose" by defering metadata writes. This has the downside of making ext2fs > filesystem integrity unreliable in the face of a system crash or power > failure. FFS does not have this problem, but is much slower as a result. > Ext2fs can get by being a little more fast and loose than FFS because ext2fs doesn't have fragments. Fragment relocation and reallocation adds a little risk to ffs, but not much. -- John | Never try to teach a pig to sing, dyson@iquest.net | it makes one look stupid jdyson@nc.com | and it irritates the pig. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901262134.QAA01210>