Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:02:33 +0100 From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> To: Ilia Chipitsine <ilia@cgilh.chel.su> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: why FFS is THAT slower than EXT2 ? Message-ID: <19991027180233.A20602@gosset.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910272118130.390-101000@localhost.cgu.chel.su> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910272118130.390-101000@localhost.cgu.chel.su>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 27, 1999 at 09:33:20PM +0600, Ilia Chipitsine wrote: I did a similar test ages ago, only I was extracting a version of the Linux kernel. The FreeBSD machine came out about 10% faster, despite the fact it was running squid and had an older, slower disk. FreeBSD: 112.95 109.00 112.14 109.71 111.68 111.41 111.88 Linux: 122.99 122.11 123.35 121.88 121.70 123.47 124.94 I think what you're seeing is the fact that ports is an extream case. If you want to put a system which tries to keep metadata consistant through hell then create lots of small files! You could try and see how working without soft updates and working async changes the timings. (Also - make sure you've set up softupdates correctly - it is quite easy to think you've turned softupdates on and actually have them off!) David. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991027180233.A20602>