From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: OGAWA Hirofumi Subject: Re: Tux3 Report: Faster than tmpfs, what? Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 16:59:29 +0900 Message-ID: <87mwrydmam.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> References: <20130510045049.GU24635@dastard> <87fvxvz8qw.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <20130514063438.GF29466@dastard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tux3@tux3.org, Daniel Phillips , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Chinner Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130514063438.GF29466@dastard> (Dave Chinner's message of "Tue, 14 May 2013 16:34:38 +1000") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tux3-bounces@phunq.net Sender: tux3-bounces@phunq.net List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Dave Chinner writes: >> Right. Because tux3 is not implementing fsync() yet. So, I did >> >> grep -v Flush /usr/share/dbench/client.txt > client2.txt >> >> Why is it important for comparing? > > Because nobody could reproduce your results without working that > out. You didn't disclose that you'd made these changes, and that > makes it extremely misleading as to what the results mean. Given the > headline-grab nature of it, it's deceptive at best. > > I don't care how fast tux3 is - I care about being able to reproduce > other people's results. Hence if you are going to report benchmark > results comparing filesystems then you need to tell everyone exactly > what you've tweaked and why, from the hardware all the way up to the > benchmark config. Thanks for adivce. -- OGAWA Hirofumi