From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932270AbVKUL7e (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2005 06:59:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932272AbVKUL7e (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2005 06:59:34 -0500 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.204]:36437 "EHLO zproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932270AbVKUL7d convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2005 06:59:33 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=TUqn+b7SnDMm/e/vriahwnjAixEiqG+KPi39JPAzJnfhHgNKm9yZkI2FvOYoDb1J8tc0R8Tab9EhFOAxCNPhyjMiYguTXixhnHdbXiM6EfbsO2PATTNanrKDnnVAxMf4K/CIpXlIWPJgyocOsve2e2t/hYn5ZcyE4GKQakqpJAo= Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 12:59:26 +0100 From: Diego Calleja To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?J=F6rn?= Engel Cc: alfredbrons@yahoo.com, pocm@sat.inesc-id.pt, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: what is our answer to ZFS? Message-Id: <20051121125926.da8a35cc.diegocg@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20051121101959.GB13927@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> References: <11b141710511210144h666d2edfi@mail.gmail.com> <20051121095915.83230.qmail@web36406.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20051121101959.GB13927@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.1.6 (GTK+ 2.8.3; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org El Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:19:59 +0100, Jörn Engel escribió: > question will be easily answered. I still haven't found the time to > dig for all the information underneith the marketing blur. Me neither, at now that we are talking about marketing impact, has people run benchmarks on it? (I'd do it myself but downloading a iso with a dialup link takes some time 8) I've found numbers against other kernels: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-perform/2005/11/18/0000.html http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/roch?entry=zfs_to_ufs_performance_comparison http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/erickustarz?entry=fs_perf_201_postmark http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/erickustarz?entry=fs_perf_102_filesystem_bw