From owner-freebsd-questions  Mon Jul 24 14:30:50 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from houston.matchlogic.com (houston.matchlogic.com [205.216.147.127])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 705C837BD1F
	for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from crandall@matchlogic.com)
Received: by houston.matchlogic.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
	id <PA5LYW9M>; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:30:40 -0600
Message-ID: <5FE9B713CCCDD311A03400508B8B301301C784B9@bdr-xcln.is.matchlogic.com>
From: Charles Randall <crandall@matchlogic.com>
To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>,
	The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: RE: Need to compare FreeBSD -> Solaris 8 ...
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:30:35 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

From: Alfred Perlstein [mailto:bright@wintelcom.net]
>Enable softupdates and blow solaris out of the water on
>file/metadata intensive tests. :)

With UFS, sure. 

But, wouldn't you have to compare that with Solaris and the Veritas file
system to be fair?

http://www.veritas.com/us/products/filesystem/

Sure, Veritas costs money... (argument about softupdates costing money in a
commercial environment deleted). Hmm, looks like Kirk has opened up the
license on softupdates,

http://www.mckusick.com/softdep/index.html

"Effective June 21, 2000 the soft updates code was released under a
Berkeley-style copyright which allows unrestricted use in source and binary
forms for commercial or non-commercial use." 

That's great news.

Perhaps UFS versus FFS+softupdtes is a fair comparison after all.

Charles


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message