It makes you wonder what reiser4 isn't doing that reiser is.. :') I'm joking...
As for ext3 being faster that xfs... hmmm... Not surprised. On Friday 08 August 2003 09:20 am, Collins Richey wrote: > Interesting article and lots of critiques at > > http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/715 > > The following extract shows the basic differences. This is German > number notation with commas and periods reversed. > > reiser4 reiserfs ext3 XFS JFS > copy 33.39,34% 39.55,32% 39.42,25% 43.50,32% 48.15,20% > sync 1.54,00% 3.15,10% 9.05,00% 2.08,10% 3.05,10% > recopy1 31.09,34% 75.15,13% 79.96, 9% 102.37,12% 108.39, 5% > recopy2 33.15,33% 77.62,13% 98.84, 7% 108.00,12% 114.96, 5% > sync 2.89, 3% 3.84, 1% 8.15, 0% 2.40, 2% 3.86, 0% > du 2.05,42% 2.46,21% 3.31,11% 3.73,32% 2.42,17% > delete 7.41,52% 5.22,58% 3.71,39% 8.75,56% 15.33, 7% > tar 52.25,25% 90.83,12% 74.93,13% 157.61, 7% 135.86, 6% > sync 6.77, 2% 4.19, 3% 1.67, 1% 0.95, 1% 38.18, 0% > overall 171.28,30% 302.53,16% 319.71,11% 429.79,13% 470.88, 6% > > In general, reiser4 looks to be a real winner (when it's out of > development, of course), and my favorite EXT3 and everyone else's > favorite XFS are among the slowest. -- ****************************************************************************** Registered Linux User Number 185956 http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=linux Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net This email account no longers accepts attachments or messages containing html. 7:45pm up 29 days, 5:43, 4 users, load average: 1.03, 1.20, 1.29 _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
