Journaling performance (Updated)
Mathias Scheler has an interesting
about the difference of using journaling on
file system performance. The test he did was extracting NetBSD 4.0
A clear winner. (No numbers with soft dependencies, though,
but they can be expected to be comparable to the journaling
- With plain FFS, the extract took 15:19 minutes
- With journaling, it took 3:24 minutes.
updated numbers that include soft dependencies. The best bet so far
is still WAPBL. It's a bit slower than async mounts, but as they are
VERY unsafe, that's not recommended, at all. Use WAPBL!
[Tags: journaling, wapbl]