15.12.2011 17:36, Michael Larabel пишет: > On 12/15/2011 07:25 AM, Stefan Esser wrote: >> Am 15.12.2011 11:10, schrieb Michael Larabel: >>> No, the same hardware was used for each OS. >>> >>> In terms of the software, the stock software stack for each OS was used. >> Just curious: Why did you choose ZFS on FreeBSD, while UFS2 (with >> journaling enabled) should be an obvious choice since it is more similar >> in concept to ext4 and since that is what most FreeBSD users will use >> with FreeBSD? > > I was running some ZFS vs. UFS tests as well and this happened to have > ZFS on when I was running some other tests. > Can we look at the tests? My opinion is ZFS without tuning is much slower than UFS2.Received on Thu Dec 15 2011 - 13:44:40 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:22 UTC