Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!ub!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!pell.pell.chi.il.us!there.is.no.cabal
From: orc@pell.chi.il.us (Orc)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: The better (more suitable)Unix?? FreeBSD or Linux
Date: 6 Feb 1996 11:33:57 -0800
Organization: Fluffiness is the true Tao
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4f8af5$ag7@pell.pell.chi.il.us>
References: <4er9hp$5ng@orb.direct.ca> <4f27sc$13a@dyson.iquest.net> <4f4c78$dsb@aurora.romoidoy.com> <4f4jal$epr@nntp5.u.washington.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pell.pell.chi.il.us
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:13878 comp.os.linux.development.system:17451
In article <4f4jal$epr@nntp5.u.washington.edu>,
Craig Johnston <caj@tower.stc.housing.washington.edu> wrote:
[is e2fs faster or slower than ffs? deleted]
>Kind of a blanket statement. In my case, on a ncr53c810 SCSI chip, FreeBSD
>feels _much_ faster than 1.2 Linux kernels. I do hear that Linux support
>for this chip has improved in recent 1.3 kernels, but it was rotten in
>1.2.. no disconnects, slow.
Well, don't forget that the Linux buffer cache is a bit slower
than the FreeBSD one; until e2fs is working for FreeBSD (or ffs is
working for Linux, though I suspect that e2fs will be released for
BSD first), comparing their speeds is nothing more than an exercise
in navel-gazing.
____
david parsons \bi/ orc@pell.com^H^Hhi.il.us
\/