From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Oct 27 9:40:52 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from penelope.skunk.org (penelope.skunk.org [208.133.204.51]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A67E15563; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:39:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ben@penelope.skunk.org) Received: from localhost (ben@localhost) by penelope.skunk.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA95328; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:44:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:44:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Ben Rosengart To: Chuck Robey Cc: Chuck Youse , Ilia Chipitsine , questions@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: why FFS is THAT slower than EXT2 ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Chuck Robey wrote: > On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Ben Rosengart wrote: > > > On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Chuck Youse wrote: > > > > > One of the biggest reasons for the difference: FreeBSD, by default, > > > performs _synchronous_ metadata updates, and Linux performs asynchronous > > > metadata updates. > > > > > > It's definitely a bit slower, but the payoff is in reliability. I have > > > seen more than one [production!] Linux machine completely trash its > > > filesystems because the implementors decided that their "NT-killer" must > > > have good performance at the expense of serious, production-quality > > > reliability. > > > > Read the post again -- they were using soft updates. > > Why is that important? Soft updates is still far better than an async > filesystem. Have you lost files in panics? I haven't. What panics? I've been running -stable and it's been living up to the name. I was pointing out to Chuck Youse that BSD metadata writes are also (mostly) asynchronous now, so if FFS is truly slower than ext2fs, there must be some other reason. -- Ben Rosengart UNIX Systems Engineer, Skunk Group StarMedia Network, Inc. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message