Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:26:16 +0400 From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@FreeBSD.org> To: Michael Larabel <michael.larabel@phoronix.com> Cc: 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: <4EEA0388.7010605@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4EE9F7D2.4050607@phoronix.com> 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> <4EE9F7D2.4050607@phoronix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
15.12.2011 17:36, Michael Larabel пишет: > On 12/15/2011 07:25 AM, 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? > > I was running some ZFS vs. UFS tests as well and this happened to have > ZFS on when I was running some other tests. > Can we look at the tests? My opinion is ZFS without tuning is much slower than UFS2.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EEA0388.7010605>