From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Oct 27 18:23:51 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (genesi.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.136.161]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3298614CE9; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:23:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (doconnor@cain [203.38.152.97]) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA19704; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 10:53:15 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3.1 [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87n1t4r4h8.fsf@muon.xs4all.nl> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 10:53:15 +0930 (CST) From: "Daniel O'Connor" To: Peter Mutsaers Subject: Re: why FFS is THAT slower than EXT2 ? Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, questions@freebsd.org, Ilia Chipitsine Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 27-Oct-99 Peter Mutsaers wrote: > The only exception might be untarring large tarballs. Linux makes more > aggressive use of the filesystem buffer; it even swaps out quite > active processes to be able to cache large amounts. The drawback is > that the system as a whole tends to become quite sluggish, while BSD > has a better balance between keeping active processes and > filesystem-cache. Is there anyway to tune this behaviour under FreeBSD? I know the argument is that 'FreeBSD is self tuning' but some of us are unable to resist fiddling =) --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message