Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 28 Oct 1999 10:53:15 +0930 (CST)
From:      "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
To:        Peter Mutsaers <peter@mutsaers.com>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org, questions@freebsd.org, Ilia Chipitsine <ilia@cgilh.chel.su>
Subject:   Re: why FFS is THAT slower than EXT2 ?
Message-ID:  <XFMail.991028105315.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <87n1t4r4h8.fsf@muon.xs4all.nl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On 27-Oct-99 Peter Mutsaers wrote:
>  The only exception might be untarring large tarballs. Linux makes more
>  aggressive use of the filesystem buffer; it even swaps out quite
>  active processes to be able to cache large amounts. The drawback is
>  that the system as a whole tends to become quite sluggish, while BSD
>  has a better balance between keeping active processes and
>  filesystem-cache.

Is there anyway to tune this behaviour under FreeBSD? I know the argument is
that 'FreeBSD is self tuning' but some of us are unable to resist fiddling =)

---
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum


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?XFMail.991028105315.doconnor>