-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 16 May 2006 17:01:05 +0100,
BearItAll <spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | There are a lot of Linux filesystems comparisons available but most of
>> | them are anecdotal, based on artificial tasks or completed under older
>> | kernels. This benchmark essay is based on 11 real-world tasks
>> | appropriate for a file server with older generation hardware (Pentium
>> | II/III, EIDE hard-drive).
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388
>
> That isn't an entirely fair comparison. ReiserFS would show greater benefits
> on larger systems than ext3 would, because that was ReiserFS's orriginal
> target. You didn't tend to use it at all unless you were on at least 80G.
>
That may have been ReiserFS's *goal* but that doesn't mean it actually
made that goal. Maybe it did, but don't assume so.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEariLd90bcYOAWPYRAjPLAJwKHf0c2j8eHav1o9s3Z3Mu0Q/pUwCfY6l1
jQV7WBljJiP1SVzyuY02xro=
=a6FK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Every day, in a new way, I am grateful, that I can chose Linux.
|
|
