Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 15:51:33 +0200 From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> To: Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org> Cc: Michael Larabel <michael.larabel@phoronix.com>, FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Michael Ross <gmx@ross.cx>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de>, Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server Message-ID: <E76CA6AF-4109-4627-AF9B-D1C7C4C6D4E2@digsys.bg> In-Reply-To: <4EE9F546.6060503@freebsd.org> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <CAJ-FndDniGH8QoT=kUxOQ%2BzdVhWF0Z0NKLU0PGS-Gt=BK6noWw@mail.gmail.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <CAFHbX1%2B5PttyZuNnYot8emTn_AWkABdJCvnpo5rcRxVXj0ypJA@mail.gmail.com> <4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CAPjTQNEJDE17TLH-mDrG_-_Qa9R5N3mSeXSYYWtqz_DFidzYQw@mail.gmail.com> <20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan> <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <op.v6iv3qe5g7njmm@michael-think> <4EE9C79B.7080607@phoronix.com> <4EE9F546.6060503@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 15, 2011, at 3:25 PM, Stefan Esser wrote: > Am 15.12.2011 11:10, schrieb Michael Larabel: >> No, the same hardware was used for each OS. >> >> In terms of the software, the stock software stack for each OS was used. > > Just curious: Why did you choose ZFS on FreeBSD, while UFS2 (with > journaling enabled) should be an obvious choice since it is more similar > in concept to ext4 and since that is what most FreeBSD users will use > with FreeBSD? Or perhaps, since it is "server" Linux distribution, use ZFS on Linux as well. With identical tuning on both Linux and FreeBSD. Having the same FS used by both OS will help make the comparison more sensible for FS I/O. Daniel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E76CA6AF-4109-4627-AF9B-D1C7C4C6D4E2>