Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 09:03:19 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: Chris BeHanna <chris@pennasoft.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 5-STABLE Roadmap Message-ID: <15948.63271.427854.685742@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <200302140028.21669.chris@pennasoft.com> References: <200302140036.h1E0aK3q071051@freefall.freebsd.org> <a05200f0dba72122437d7@[10.0.1.2]> <25c301c2d3e1$8f2e3e30$52557f42@errno.com> <200302140028.21669.chris@pennasoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chris BeHanna writes: > > > At 4:36 PM -0800 2003/02/13, Scott Long wrote: > > > > - Fstress - http://www.cs.duke.edu/ari/fstress > > SpecFS (NFS ops/sec benchmark) > Have you ever actually used SPECsfs97? In addition to being encumbered, SPECsfs97 is pain to keep running (dies at the drop of a hat), and a nightmare to setup. Fstress was designed as an easy-to-use, more generic replacement for things like SPECsfs97. Fstress development was motivated by one of our best former grad students attempting to use SPECsfs97 to benchmark the FS he did his thesis work on. Rather than wasting his time fixing SPECsfs97, he wrote his own from the ground up and got a paper out of it... Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15948.63271.427854.685742>