From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Apr 24 07:40:16 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id HAA06284
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 07:40:16 -0700
Received: from shell1.best.com (root@shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id HAA06275
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 07:40:14 -0700
Received: from geli.clusternet (rcarter.vip.best.com [204.156.137.2]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id HAA28972; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 07:39:52 -0701
Received: (from rcarter@localhost) by geli.clusternet (8.6.11/8.6.9) id HAA00203; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 07:17:36 -0700
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 07:17:36 -0700
From: "Russell L. Carter" <rcarter@geli.com>
Message-Id: <199504241417.HAA00203@geli.clusternet>
To: hasty@star-gate.com, jkh@violet.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: benchmark hell..
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

|>>> Jordan K. Hubbard said:
|
| > File Copy	  	      2447.0  13.7     3149.0  17.6    3256.0 18.2
|
|Well, file copy on Linux systems is faster because of the meta-data async
|behavior. Not that is safe thing to have on a system but on benchmarks
|it looks good.
|
|	Amancio

But of course it also depends on the particular driver, sometimes
mostly so.  The benchmarks I ran on Linux systems last fall certainly showed
that; both NetBSD and FreeBSD were quite a bit faster than Linux 1.1.59 running
the ncr controller.  I have been politely asking my Linux acquaintences for
an update, to no avail.  Wonder why?

The upshot is I don't think there is anything significant gained by ffs2,
in real systems.

Russell