Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:51:03 -0500 (EST)
From:      "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
To:        dicen@hooked.net (RHS Linux User)
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: What is the default for async in /etc/fstab?
Message-ID:  <199701270051.TAA20481@dyson.iquest.net>
In-Reply-To: <32EBC635.4F86F1D5@hooked.net> from "RHS Linux User" at Jan 26, 97 01:01:41 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 
> Have other people tested ufs vs. ext2? The only docs I could find where
> for ext2. A comparison with FreeBSD 2.0 I think, although it could have
> been older. This was for some old Linux 1.xx. 
> 
The performance that I have measured (sequential -- IOZONE) is that
FreeBSD is faster in both read/write.  However, our metadata performance
is slower (filecreates/deletes.)  With -async, our metadata is still
slower, but not by orders of magnitude.  FreeBSD's cache perf is much
faster (by factors of 3-4.)  Much of it is due to the default block
size (8K vs. 1K.)  But the fragment size of an 8K UFS filesystem is
the *same* as a 1K ext2fs.

Both are very fast though.

John



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701270051.TAA20481>