On Monday 10 October 2005 17:14, Kirk Coombs wrote: > On Monday 10 October 2005 3:31 am, nordi wrote: > > Shriramana Sharma wrote: > > > Well you know what they say - your mileage may vary. Nordi's test meant > > > that for him ext3 was faster. Now maybe I've missed some mails in this > > > thread but until someone else has confirmed Nordi's on a widely > > > different configuration of a PC, one cannot conclude that the problem > > > is with reiserfs. > > > > Exactly! That's also the reason why I'd like other people to make > > benchmarks of unmodified ReiserFS vs unmodified Ext3. The only other PC > > I have available for testing is a K6-2 300Mhz, and that would certainly > > not be representative for your average Suse PC. > > I have a pentium III 600 i'll test it on. Again, not a 'typical' pc, but at > least it's something.
I have did a quick test of it, and I can't confirm it. I was measuring a bit different numbers -- a time till login window appears (which is what probably matters for me), I have got the same numbers for both ext3 and reiser. Are you sure your results are not due to different hdd read speed for different partitions? -- Best regards, Alexander. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
