Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:34:49 +0200 From: "Jose M. Alcaide" <jose@we.lc.ehu.es> To: Sung Nae Cho <sucho2@quasar.phys.vt.edu> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Softupdate, is it better than journaling file system? Message-ID: <3B5D3329.73CA6423@we.lc.ehu.es> References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0107232038230.17179-100000@quasar.phys.vt.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sung Nae Cho wrote: > > I was wondering if there is a real perferomance comparison between > softupdates and journaling file systems available for Linux systems. One > thing I still don't like about FreeBSD is the file (copying, deleting, > extracting... etc) system performance. Linux seems to be much faster in > (copying, deleting, extracting.....) files than FreeBSD even with "async" > option enabled in fstab. How good is softupdates compared to those > already maturing journaling file systems available to Linux? > FreeBSD comes out of the box with filesystem robustness in mind, instead of performance. However, you can tune the system for getting higher disk performance. First, you should enable "softupdates" on each filesystem, using tunefs(8). And, if your system has ATA disks, you could enable the write cache; the procedure is described in ata(4), but in a few words, add hw.ata.wc="1" to /boot/loader.conf and reboot. -- JMA ****** Jose M. Alcaide // jose@we.lc.ehu.es // jmas@FreeBSD.org ****** ** "Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers" -- Leonard Brandwein ** To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B5D3329.73CA6423>