Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 08:43:54 -0600 From: Bob Martin <bob@buckhorn.net> Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD as Server Message-ID: <43C90E2A.9040702@buckhorn.net> In-Reply-To: <43C8A873.8000900@matrixhome.net> References: <375DD163B075E34EA3C10A6286E34A54C1D4B5@exhsto1.se.dataphone.com> <43C7A18D.8060904@centtech.com> <43C7B008.8060404@matrixhome.net> <20060113163525.nkluhr8fwg8k0oc0@netchild.homeip.net> <43C8A873.8000900@matrixhome.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
EXT is based on the Minix file system. Ext2 was the brain child of Rémy Card, and has had a totally different development path than UFS. UFS was based on the Berkeley Fast File System. It dates back to the CSRG, and the infancy of UNIX. There are a number of books by Kirk McKusick on the subject. There have been tons of debates about UFS vs <fill in blank> on the net over the years. YMMV, but if you want speed and stability, my money is on UFS2. The benchmark you referred to does not show things like recovery time or data loss after a catastrophic failure. I also noted that the benchmark was using an ATA133 IDE drive. Nothing wrong with that in itself, but it has long been my experience that the type of drive used is usually the root cause of I/O disk problem. You can't get fast performance with slow drives. File systems are tools, just like operating systems. One size does not fit all. You have to find the one that will work best for you. UFS and UFS2 have worked well for many, for a very long time. I think if you try it, you might find you're pleasantly surprised. Bob Martin Alexander wrote: > Alexander Leidinger пишет: > >> Alexander <shulik_freebsd@matrixhome.net> wrote: >> >>> http://linuxgazette.net/122/TWDT.html#piszcz - there is comparation >>> of Linux FS. >> >> >> >> Since this doesn't cover the FreeBSD implementations of UFS or UFS2, this >> doesn't say anything about the reasons why you want to use a different >> FS on >> FreeBSD. > > > So. Ext2/Ext3 is only modification of UFS and UFS is modification of > S5FS. That's why I don't think, that UFS or UFS2 work better than > ext2/ext3. But XFS and Reiser has big advantage. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-isp@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-isp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43C90E2A.9040702>