From owner-freebsd-current Tue Nov 12 15:20:51 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA03667 for current-outgoing; Tue, 12 Nov 1996 15:20:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from smily.3skel.com (3skel.com [206.138.212.40]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA03654 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 1996 15:20:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from fnur.3skel.com (root@fnur.3skel.com [192.168.0.8]) by smily.3skel.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id SAA08947; Tue, 12 Nov 1996 18:20:16 -0500 (EST) Received: (from danj@localhost) by fnur.3skel.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id SAA25982; Tue, 12 Nov 1996 18:20:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 18:20:09 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199611122320.SAA25982@fnur.3skel.com> From: Dan Janowski To: "Justin T. Gibbs" Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ufs is too slow? In-Reply-To: <199611122025.MAA25041@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <199611122025.MAA25041@freefall.freebsd.org> Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Justin T. Gibbs writes: > > The main reason MS is looking to Veritas is that NTFS just doesn't perform > when striped or mirrored. The NOW project at Cal did I/O comparison studies > on x86 platforms using Solaris, FreeBSD, Linux and NT and found that while > FreeBSD and Solaris could achieve upwards of 30MB/s through a striped file > system, NT topped out at around 9MB/s. This was NT3.51 - they may have > improved things for 4.0. where did the Linux ext2fs fall? Dan -- danj@3skel.com Dan Janowski Triskelion Systems, Inc. Bronx, NY