Re: Tux3 Report: Faster than tmpfs, what?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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 <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux