Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:46:22 +0000 From: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> To: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Cc: Michael Larabel <michael.larabel@phoronix.com>, FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg>, Michael Ross <gmx@ross.cx>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server Message-ID: <CADLo83-28ZSaazXzk2st-BZ9rNA1fsryS38fpwRZF_dyq2sxBw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4EEA3556.7030105@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <CAJ-FndDniGH8QoT=kUxOQ%2BzdVhWF0Z0NKLU0PGS-Gt=BK6noWw@mail.gmail.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <CAFHbX1%2B5PttyZuNnYot8emTn_AWkABdJCvnpo5rcRxVXj0ypJA@mail.gmail.com> <4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CAPjTQNEJDE17TLH-mDrG_-_Qa9R5N3mSeXSYYWtqz_DFidzYQw@mail.gmail.com> <20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan> <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <op.v6iv3qe5g7njmm@michael-think> <4EE9C79B.7080607@phoronix.com> <4EE9F546.6060503@freebsd.org> <E76CA6AF-4109-4627-AF9B-D1C7C4C6D4E2@digsys.bg> <4EEA3556.7030105@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 15 December 2011 17:58, O. Hartmann <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > Since ZFS in Linux can only be achieved via FUSE (ad far as I know), it > is legitimate to compare ZFS and ext4. It would be much more competetive > to compare Linux BTRFS and FreeBSD ZFS. > Er... does ext4 guarantee data integrity? You're not comparing like with like; please do some research on the point of ZFS before asserting that they're fair comparisons. A fair(er) comparison could be ext4 with UFS+soft-updates. Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo83-28ZSaazXzk2st-BZ9rNA1fsryS38fpwRZF_dyq2sxBw>