From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 14 15:30:47 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC1FB16A41F for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:30:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bv@bilver.wjv.com) Received: from wjv.com (fl-65-40-24-38.sta.sprint-hsd.net [65.40.24.38]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A1343D46 for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:30:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bv@bilver.wjv.com) Received: from bilver.wjv.com (localhost.wjv.com [127.0.0.1]) by wjv.com (8.13.5/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k0EFUeEx043957; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:30:40 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from bv@bilver.wjv.com) Received: (from bv@localhost) by bilver.wjv.com (8.13.5/8.13.1/Submit) id k0EFUTBm043956; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:30:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from bv) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:30:29 -0500 From: Bill Vermillion To: Alexander Message-ID: <20060114153029.GA43731@wjv.com> References: <375DD163B075E34EA3C10A6286E34A54C1D4B5@exhsto1.se.dataphone.com> <43C7A18D.8060904@centtech.com> <43C7B008.8060404@matrixhome.net> <20060113163525.nkluhr8fwg8k0oc0@netchild.homeip.net> <43C8A873.8000900@matrixhome.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43C8A873.8000900@matrixhome.net> Organization: W.J.Vermillion / Orlando - Winter Park ReplyTo: bv@wjv.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, J_CHICKENPOX_22 autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on bilver.wjv.com Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org, Alexander Leidinger Subject: Re: FreeBSD as Server X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: bv@wjv.com List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:30:47 -0000 On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 09:29 , after knocking over a stack of dishes on the heat sink Alexander wondered out loud about: > Alexander Leidinger ?????: > > >Alexander 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. UFS is not a modification of S5FS - which were S51 and S52. Such concepts as cylinder groups and fragments were new ideas. Running both the S51 and an AFS [an Acer implementation of the BSD FFS[ on the same hard drive in about 1990, I saw performance increases of up to 10 times on the same hard drive. Having worked with S51 and S52 [the latter was AT&Ts idea on how to make things faster that in reality had marginal improvement] and the FFS variants they really aren't that similar. The way files are placed on the hard-drive in the FFS variants as opposed to the S5? variants also contributed to keep the drives working fast for a much longer time. In fact there were file system defragmenters built and sold for the S5? systems as the awkward and inefficient way they handled the free-list actually meant you needed to backup a file system, remake it, and restore as often as ever 6 months in the S51 systems. The brand name Unix vendors slowly adopted a lot of the FFS items from BSD as it was so much better. I've used XFS on Irix systems and for items that have a lot of large files or lots and lots of files in a single diretory, it's one of the best. To get a good idea of the S51 and FFS differences you should read Bach's book for SysV and books by Lefler, McKusick et all on BSD. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com