El Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:19:59 +0100, Jörn Engel <[email protected]> escribió: > question will be easily answered. I still haven't found the time to > dig for all the information underneith the marketing blur. Me neither, at now that we are talking about marketing impact, has people run benchmarks on it? (I'd do it myself but downloading a iso with a dialup link takes some time 8) I've found numbers against other kernels: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-perform/2005/11/18/0000.html http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/roch?entry=zfs_to_ufs_performance_comparison http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/erickustarz?entry=fs_perf_201_postmark http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/erickustarz?entry=fs_perf_102_filesystem_bw - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: what is our answer to ZFS?
- From: Paulo Jorge Matos <[email protected]>
- Re: what is our answer to ZFS?
- From: Alfred Brons <[email protected]>
- Re: what is our answer to ZFS?
- From: Jörn Engel <[email protected]>
- Re: what is our answer to ZFS?
- Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.15-rc1-mm2 -- Bad page state at free_hot_cold_page (in process 'aplay', page c18eef30)
- Next by Date: Re: floppy regression from "[PATCH] fix floppy.c to store correct ..."
- Previous by thread: Re: what is our answer to ZFS?
- Next by thread: Re: what is our answer to ZFS?
- Index(es):
 |