Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 17:47:56 +0200 From: Matthias Buelow <mkb@incubus.de> To: Greg Barniskis <nalists@scls.lib.wi.us> Cc: uzi@bmby.com, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD MySQL still WAY slower than Linux Message-ID: <200506171547.j5HFluAI042603@drjekyll.mkbuelow.net> In-Reply-To: Message from Greg Barniskis <nalists@scls.lib.wi.us> of "Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:30:25 CDT." <42B2EC91.8070800@scls.lib.wi.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Greg Barniskis <nalists@scls.lib.wi.us> writes: >that async provides fast writes at the cost of "no guarantee at all >for a consistent state of the filesystem". So, you choose: fast but >not so reliable writes, or slower writes with fast, reliable >disaster recovery. > >Thanks to the FreeBSD team for choosing the sensible default, even >if it results in the occasional "Linux is faster!" debate. Dang >smirky penguins... you're flightless I tell ya, flightless. =) Is CentOS using ext2? I thought everyone moved to ext3 already, which provides nearly the speed of ext2+async but is safe due to its journal. If you make such comparisons, please use current technology, and not the status quo of 5 years ago. [Apart from that, over the last decade, I've lost more UFS filesystems than ext2, so at least for me, that purported unsafety of ext2+async mounts is theoretical at best. In the end, with today's write-caches usually enabled, both are essentially the same, anyways.] mkb.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200506171547.j5HFluAI042603>