On Monday 10 October 2005 17:14, Kirk Coombs wrote:
On Monday 10 October 2005 3:31 am, nordi wrote:
Shriramana Sharma wrote:
Well you know what they say - your mileage may vary. Nordi's test meant that for him ext3 was faster. Now maybe I've missed some mails in this thread but until someone else has confirmed Nordi's on a widely different configuration of a PC, one cannot conclude that the problem is with reiserfs.
Exactly! That's also the reason why I'd like other people to make benchmarks of unmodified ReiserFS vs unmodified Ext3. The only other PC I have available for testing is a K6-2 300Mhz, and that would certainly not be representative for your average Suse PC.
I have a pentium III 600 i'll test it on. Again, not a 'typical' pc, but at least it's something.
I have did a quick test of it, and I can't confirm it. I was measuring a bit different numbers -- a time till login window appears (which is what probably matters for me), I have got the same numbers for both ext3 and reiser. Are you sure your results are not due to different hdd read speed for different partitions? -- Best regards, Alexander.