Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Benchmarked: Ubuntu vs Vista vs Win7

<< < (4/4)

f0dder:
Well, actually it looks like they have improved IO quite a lot for Win 7. I wonder how they did that, as they are still using NTFS...-urlwolf (February 06, 2009, 03:56 AM)
--- End quote ---
I'm not taking anything in that article serious since they disabled write caching :)

Btw, Windows (at least client versions) is usually way too conservative wrt. disk caching. Probably because so many morons are "OMFG IT USES THE MEMORY I HAVE INSTALLED IN MY SYSTEM!11!1!", coming from a total lack of understanding of how filesystem cache works.

Edvard:
Here's hoping that Ubuntu's new Juvenile Jackass (or whatever they decide to call it) is better than Ibex.
-40hz (February 05, 2009, 09:06 PM)
--- End quote ---

 ;D ;D ;D

8.10 punked me good. So I'm using openSUSE for the meantime. However, the latest Fedora 11 beta offers both BtrFS and Ext4 filesystems as defaults if you want.
-zridling (February 06, 2009, 05:47 AM)
--- End quote ---
from the Btrfs wiki:
Btrfs is under heavy development, and is not suitable for any uses other than benchmarking and review. The Btrfs disk format is not yet finalized, but it will only be changed if a critical bug is found and no workarounds are possible.
--- End quote ---

I can wait...

I'm not taking anything in that article serious since they disabled write caching :)

Btw, Windows (at least client versions) is usually way too conservative wrt. disk caching. Probably because so many morons are "OMFG IT USES THE MEMORY I HAVE INSTALLED IN MY SYSTEM!11!1!", coming from a total lack of understanding of how filesystem cache works.
-f0dder (February 06, 2009, 09:32 AM)
--- End quote ---

I agree. Maybe they just wanted to "take some lead out of the gloves" to measure raw throughput? It does seem kind of unfair to not let a particular OS show off some of it's best tricks...

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page