Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:47:22 -0300 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> To: Jason Andresen <jandrese@mitre.org> Cc: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu>, ccf@master.ndi.net, gordont@bluemtn.net, jkh@osd.bsdi.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: technical comparison Message-ID: <3B0B089A.AA97F518@newsguy.com> References: <200105220411.f4M4BDX101825@saturn.cs.uml.edu> <3B0A8DD5.9A38449B@mitre.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jason Andresen wrote: > > Results: > ufs+softupdates is a little slower than ext2fs+wc for low numbers of > files, but scales better. I wish I had a Reiserfs partition to > test with. Ext2fs is a non-contender. Note, though, that there is some very recent perfomance improvement on very large directories known as dirpref (what changed, actually, was dirpref's algorithm). This is NOT present on 4.3-RELEASE, though it _might_ have since been committed to stable. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org capo@the.secret.bsdconspiracy.net wow regex humor... I'm a geek To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B0B089A.AA97F518>