Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 12 Feb 1998 12:32:55 -0800
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
To:        Konrad Heuer <kheuer@gwdu60.gwdg.de>
Cc:        Vincent Defert <vdefert@trace.fr>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD vs Linux
Message-ID:  <34E35C77.59E2B600@whistle.com>
References:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.980212162047.24814A-100000@gwdu60.gwdg.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The soft-update code we are testing addresses this problem.
It uses a syncer similar to linux's and does 99.9% of all writes 
async, but with a guarantee of write order, calculated at 
run-time through dependancy graphs..
we're just shaking out some minor bugs in it but it's rock solid
at the moment.


Konrad Heuer wrote:
> 

> 
> 3. Since the Linux 2nd Extended File Systems by default also buffers inode
> and comparable data it's faster in operations like unpacking tar files.
> With some risk one can mount a FreeBSD Fast File System with an async
> option but then the dirty buffers containing critical data will be flushed
> only in 30 second intervals. Linux runs a special bdflush daemon with a 5
> second interval for critical data which is more reliable.
> On the other hand I found the sequential writes and (much more important)
> reads of larger files are about 30%..50% faster with FreeBSD and the FFS.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe questions" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?34E35C77.59E2B600>