Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
Kevin Wilcox
kevin.wilcox at gmail.com
Fri Jan 7 15:04:30 UTC 2011
- Previous message: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
- Next message: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
On 7 January 2011 09:12, Paul Pathiakis <pathiaki2 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> This is almost laughable. I'd like to know what parameters they were tuning. I
> used FreeBSD with ZFS to make a point to people using Debian on EXT3, EXT4, XFS
> just two years ago. They were interested in total throughput and TPS. Well, I
> used the SAME MACHINE and rebuilt it from scratch with the same parameters
> except the filesystems and the last time I changed the OS to FreeBSD with ZFS.
Paul - Phoronix has a history of "performance benchmarks" that skew
*heavily* towards Linux and away from the BSDs, which is to say their
"benchmarks" are hardly indicative of Real Life. I know I'm in for a
laugh any time I see someone reference one of their "performance
tests" regarding Linux/BSD.
Sadly, a lot of folks will look at that and say, "See? An independent,
non-biased review..."
kmw
- Previous message: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
- Next message: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
More information about the freebsd-performance
mailing list