From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jun 14 20:20:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from virtual-voodoo.com (virtual-voodoo.com [204.120.165.254]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 609BE37B405 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:20:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from steve@virtual-voodoo.com) Received: (from steve@localhost) by virtual-voodoo.com (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f5F3KkH47522; Thu, 14 Jun 2001 22:20:46 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from steve) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 22:20:46 -0500 From: Steve Ames To: Rajappa Iyer Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Sysadmin article Message-ID: <20010614222046.A75265@virtual-voodoo.com> References: <200106150223.f5F2NLW08368@panix1.panix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200106150223.f5F2NLW08368@panix1.panix.com>; from rsi@panix.com on Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 10:23:21PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 10:23:21PM -0400, Rajappa Iyer wrote: > http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0107/0107a/0107a.htm > > Any obvious reasons why FreeBSD performed so poorly for these people? Hrm... the filesystem test, I think, is fairly obvious. The default filesystem configuration doesn't have softupdates. Linux always outperforms FreeBSD on filesystem tests using "out of the box" configurations. The others I'm iffy on. There was still a file system element in the other tests as well (delivering e-mail) and depending on the way they layout their email the new dirpref code may help out a bit? -Steve > > rsi > -- > a.k.a. Rajappa Iyer. > They also surf who stand in the waves. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message