Adrian Ulrich wrote: > See also: http://spam.workaround.ch/dull/postmark.txt > > A quick'n'dirty ZFS-vs-UFS-vs-Reiser3-vs-Reiser4-vs-Ext3 'benchmark'
Whatever Postmark does, this looks pretty besides the point. Are these actual transactions with the "D"urability guarantee? 3000/s doesn't look too much like you're doing synchronous I/O (else figures around 70/s perhaps 100/s would be more adequate), and cache exercise is rather irrelevant for databases that manage real (=valuable) data... -- Matthias Andree
