lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: xfs: does mkfs.xfs require fancy switches to get decent performance? (was Tux3 Report: How fast can we fsync?)
From
Date
On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 04:14 -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote:

> Lovely sounding argument, but it is wrong because Tux3 still beats XFS
> even with seek time factored out of the equation.

Hm. Do you have big-storage comparison numbers to back that? I'm no
storage guy (waiting for holographic crystal arrays to obsolete all this
crap;), but Dave's big-storage guy words made sense to me.

-Mike



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-30 14:41    [W:0.145 / U:0.228 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site