| To: | Linux-Xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | is this list or project still alive? comments on latest benchmarks? |
| From: | "L. A. Walsh" <xfs@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:11:48 -0800 |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) |
This is a multi-pronged email..., sorta... Haven't seen any email from this list since 12/15/05. Is this list still alive? Is the xfs project still alive? Also was wondering if there were any comments on the recent benchmarks mentioned on "slashdot" where xfs showed up last by minor amounts in almost all areas. The differences were minor, but notable for bean counters -- was it a bad test or bad configuration for xfs or are development resources being spent on the other filesystems at too great an amount for xfs to keep pace? Are there still reasons why one should stay with xfs other than warm fuzzies? Copying (using tar or cpio) a kernel tree seemed to be pretty file system stressful. XFS did seem to be lower on cpu usage in some of the tests compared to some of the higher performing filesystems, but the overall performance was frustrating (still being a firm xfs "fan"). Perhaps the others aren't up to speed in the extended attribute support yet? Anyway -- suppose I should see if this bounces or gets answered. -Linda |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | mkswap'ed an xfs partition, Robert Thralls |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: is this list or project still alive? comments on latest benchmarks?, Justin Piszcz |
| Previous by Thread: | mkswap'ed an xfs partition, Robert Thralls |
| Next by Thread: | Re: is this list or project still alive? comments on latest benchmarks?, Justin Piszcz |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |