What does fsbench say? It has the best writing performance too?!?
No, according to the fsbench results, ReiserFS wins on Read Performance,
but XFS is, approximately, four times more faster on write.
I said that the ReiserFS have the best performance based on my
read/write server statics, where read requests are 70% of total I/O
requests.
Ah. Too bad reiserfs is not stable enough for you.
In production, with ReiserFS, the server load average was around 30%
lower than XFS.
I guess Hans got something right with his reiserfs.
Please post your findings. :-)
I'm doing new tests with ReiserFS, XFS, EXT3 and JFS in CentOS 5. I will
post soon as possible.
Thank you very much in advance.
And sorry for my english...
No need to be and it is not bad at all.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
