Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:1263 comp.os.linux:56393 Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!library.ucla.edu!news.mic.ucla.edu!unixg.ubc.ca!acs.ucalgary.ca!cpsc.ucalgary.ca!xenlink!fsa.ca!deraadt From: deraadt@fsa.ca (Theo de Raadt) Subject: Re: FYI.. benchmarks on linux and 386bsd In-Reply-To: hsu@cs.hut.fi's message of 15 Oct 1993 18: 08:53 GMT Message-ID: <DERAADT.93Oct15124106@newt.fsa.ca> Sender: news@fsa.ca Nntp-Posting-Host: newt.fsa.ca Organization: little lizard city References: <2CB12A8D.17397@news.service.uci.edu> <MYCROFT.93Oct6054959@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <29klpf$8ae@kralizec.zeta.org.au> <HSU.93Oct15200852@laphroaig.cs.hut.fi> Distribution: inet Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 19:41:06 GMT Lines: 34 hsu@cs.hut.fi (Heikki Suonsivu) writes: > bde@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) writes: > >for this and therefore risks serious file system corruption should the > >... > >A measly 10 to 20 times faster. This is one thing makes Linux "feel" > Personally, I would prefer that there would be per-filesystem option to set > whether you wish file system structure updates done synchronously. > Normally one wants the system be reasonably stable, but when doing large > copies of directory trees (like moving contents of one filesystem to > another) it would be nice to avoid extra cost of doing synchronous IO. No thanks. I want reliability of my filesystems during a crash. fsck and the filesystem are supposed to work together; the filesystem must gaurantee that writes (especially during directory operations) are done in a repeatable order so that fsck can figure out where in the sequence of writes the crash occurred. fsck's purpose is simple: it is supposed to back out of those unfinished operations. Since BSD FFS gaurantees a cluster of related writes to be done in such an atomic way; it is much more likely that fsck can reconstruct the filesystem. There are gauranteed to be only a few changes in-progress. With Linux things are different: if you have a Linux machine try this: run both a file creation and deletion program at the same time, ie. % rm largedir & tar xf file.tar & when the disks are going, hit reset Invariably, Linux will have more filesystem corruption than BSD. An additional comment; I believe the BSD buffer cache clusters a few types of operations that need not be clustered, I am hoping that Torek will jump in here and give more details.. -- This space not left unintentionally unblank. deraadt@fsa.ca