Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 20:10:08 +0200 (SAT) From: Robert Nordier <rnordier@iafrica.com> To: leisner@sdsp.mc.xerox.com (Marty Leisner) Cc: terry@lambert.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FAT filesystem performance Message-ID: <199602071810.UAA00245@eac.iafrica.com> In-Reply-To: <9602071645.AA04991@gnu.mc.xerox.com> from "Marty Leisner" at Feb 7, 96 08:45:06 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, Marty Leisner wrote: > Maybe caching is a big win... > > It can't hurt with readonly file systems... > > I found (on linux) doing iozone I got about the same > performance from msdos and ext2, doing an ls on ghostscript gave > me time for a coffee break on msdos... Thanks for that thought. It's worth generating some statistics as a help in deciding the caching issue, and I've been meaning to set something up. On MS-DOS, it's possible to determine buffer contents in terms of FAT/DIR/DATA sectors, so it shouldn't be too hard to find out what exactly is happening there. -- Robert Nordier
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602071810.UAA00245>