Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:24:06 +0600 From: Aleksey I Zavilohin <villain@villain.home.ems.chel.su> To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: why FFS is THAT slower than EXT2 ? Message-ID: <19991029122406.A367@villain.home.ems.chel.su> In-Reply-To: <19991027174454.A99169@chuggalug.clues.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910271229520.29073-100000@picnic.mat.net> <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910271242170.94542-100000@penelope.skunk.org> <19991027174454.A99169@chuggalug.clues.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Geoff Buckingham wrote: > > I was pointing out to Chuck Youse that BSD metadata writes are also > > (mostly) asynchronous now, so if FFS is truly slower than ext2fs, there > > must be some other reason. > > > I heard talk the linux folks where using btrees to better handle large > directories. No, current implementation ext2 (and, i think, pre-ext3 too) don`t use btree for handle large directories. Btree associated with Hash Reiser in LinuxWorld 8-) and resierfs. -- "Let's show this prehistoric bitch how we do things downtown!" -- The Ghostbusters 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?19991029122406.A367>