Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:39:45 +0200 From: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi> To: Matthias Buelow <mkb@incubus.de> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3 I/O Performance / Linux 2.6.10 | Continued Discussion Message-ID: <41F6D8C1.2040907@he.iki.fi> In-Reply-To: <41F679FF.5090809@incubus.de> References: <dc9ba0440501241359344adce1@mail.gmail.com> <41F571F4.1090504@he.iki.fi> <41F679FF.5090809@incubus.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthias Buelow wrote: > Petri Helenius wrote: > >> Are you sure you aren't comparing filesystems with different mount >> options? Async comes to mind first. > > > a) ext3 and xfs are logging filesystems, so the problem with > asynchronous metadata updates possibly corrupting the filesystem on a > crash doesn't arise. No, they have a different, though unrelated issues. I didn't notice which filesystem and which options were used for the benchmarks, that's why I was asking about it. > b) asynchronous metadata updates wouldn't have any performance benefit > on a dd if=/dev/zero of=tstfile. I was not aware that the tests were this simple. > c) please cut down your quotes, and write your answers below or > between the quoted text, instead of the outlook text-above-fullquote > style. thanks. I usually do, however in this case it was intentional. Pete
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41F6D8C1.2040907>