xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: stable release?

To: "Bernhard R. Erdmann" <be@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: stable release?
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 08:45:00 +0200
Cc: Arjen Wolfs <arjen@xxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3BC53B9B.8AC295CA@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.BSI.4.10.10110110713570.21555-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 08:26 11-10-2001 +0200, Bernhard R. Erdmann wrote:
> > > http://iserv.nl/files/xfs/ It will probably do a lot better.
> > > It is 38% faster with ext2 then the 2.4.2 kernel that came with redhat 7.1
> >
> > What a lovely marketing number! 38%! Wow, great, it rocks so much
> > faster!!! My grandma is dancing again!! (Did I tell you I don't like
> > marketing guys?)
>
> Don't offend me.
>
> 2.4.2 == 4200 seconds
> 2.4.8 == 2600 seconds
>
> You calculate the difference. It is real.

ok ok, in this particular case... Do you really want to compare two
filesystems just based on this test?

Ahem, the filesystems were _both_ ext2. This was to illustrate that the later kernel is a lot faster then what whas shipped on 1.0.

I was testing the machine for stability and was not using XFS yet. Dell configured the machine with the wrong scsi backplane which means I need to reinstall anyways.

--
Seth
Every program has two purposes one for which
it was written and another for which it wasn't
I use the last kind.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>