On Sat, 2003-08-09 at 09:58, Ben de Luca wrote: > http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/715 > > > Whats this, reiserfs4 wins? How can that be XFS is clearly superior in > my mind at least.
Have you been running reiserfs4? I was under the impression that Hans hadn't made the patch available for 2.6 yet. My understanding is (without a thorough reading of that document) that reiserfs3 is a little faster than xfs for most operations (though where it really shines is with lots of small files, eg maildirs). However, reiserfs4 is significantly faster than reierfs3. I was reading about reiserfs4 the other day -- Hans is doing some really nifty stuff with it. Reiser also supports this notion of plugins for your filesystem, though that's not really relevant to this benchmark. But it's horses for courses. XFS is said to have better (ie extant) recovery tools. I've never needed to recover either filesystem, so can't comment. Reiserfs is in general faster though. James. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
