On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:02:15 PDT, Caleb Gray said: > Reiser4's responsiveness is undoubtedly at least twice as fast as ext3. > I have deployed two nearly identical servers in Florida (I live in > Washington state) but one difference: one uses ext3 and the other > reiser4. The ping time of the reiser4 server is (on average) 20ms faster > than the ext3 server. OK, I'll bite. What *POSSIBLE* reason is there for the choice of filesystem to matter to an ICMP Echo Request/Reply? I'm suspecting something else, like the ext3 server needs to re-ARP before sending the Echo Reply, or some such. > and directory structures. (Both of the filesystems have slowed down at a > similar pace for the duration of their lifetime [about 15ms].) Unclear why *that* should matter to ICMP either.
Attachment:
pgp3Ov5M10aYZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Reiser4 Inclusion
- From: Nix <[email protected]>
- Re: Reiser4 Inclusion
- References:
- Reiser4 Inclusion
- From: Caleb Gray <[email protected]>
- Reiser4 Inclusion
- Prev by Date: Odd build warning with 2.6.17.6
- Next by Date: Re: [patch] i386: fix recursive fault in page-fault handler
- Previous by thread: Re: Reiser4 Inclusion
- Next by thread: Re: Reiser4 Inclusion
- Index(es):
 |