Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

HAMMER vs. HAMMER2 Benchmarks On DragonFlyBSD 5.6

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HAMMER vs. HAMMER2 Benchmarks On DragonFlyBSD 5.6

    Phoronix: HAMMER vs. HAMMER2 Benchmarks On DragonFlyBSD 5.6

    With the newly released DragonFlyBSD 5.6 there are improvements to its original HAMMER2 file-system to the extent that it's now selected by its installer as the default file-system choice for new installations. Curious how the performance now compares between HAMMER and HAMMER2, here are some initial benchmarks on an NVMe solid-state drive using DragonFlyBSD 5.6.0...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...6-HAMMER2-Perf

  • #2
    Maybe add UFS to give some reference? Hard to put into comparison having never used DragonFly.

    Comment


    • #3

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by k1e0x View Post
        Maybe add UFS to give some reference? Hard to put into comparison having never used DragonFly.
        UFS's on dfly was slow as fu*k last time I tried it. DragonFly's UFS differs from FreeBSD. Former is UFS1 on disklabel64 slices, FreeBSD's is UFS2 on disklabel32 slices.

        Comment


        • #5
          The colors are too close to each other. Dark purple and slightly darker purple.

          Comment


          • #6
            So when are "they" going to port HAMMER2 to linux ?

            I think it is a truly modern filesystem with all the features I always wanted.
            It seems to be a worthy replacement for the license encumbered ZFS (which I have been using for many years) and WAY more advanced than any of the native linux filesystems.

            Well done Matthew Dillon and the DragonFlyBSD team !
            Last edited by Raka555; 06-19-2019, 04:11 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Raka555 View Post
              So when are "they" going to port HAMMER2 to linux ?

              I think it is a truly modern filesystem with all the features I always wanted.
              It seems to be a worthy replacement for the license encumbered ZFS (which I have been using for many years) and WAY more advanced than any of the native linux filesystems.

              Well done Matthew Dillon and the DragonFlyBSD team !
              Maybe it'll suffer from the same (licensing) problems that prevent ZFS from trully being avaliable in Linux?...
              Anyway, fortunately we seem to have good candidates in line, like bcachefs and Tux3

              Comment


              • #8
                Can we get a comparison to something else? Even if it is ZFS/EXT4 on Ubuntu? Would be nice to know even if it is not truly apples:apples

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by nomadewolf View Post

                  Maybe it'll suffer from the same (licensing) problems that prevent ZFS from trully being avaliable in Linux?...
                  Anyway, fortunately we seem to have good candidates in line, like bcachefs and Tux3
                  Hardly. dfly ain't under CDDL. If anything, problem will be in fundamental differences between respective OS families. Internally (kernel-wise) dfly is nearly as 'alien' to other BSD's as BSD's in general are to Linux.

                  I wouldn't expect much from any new Great Linux FileSystems, established pattern seems to be that they never get 'entirely completed', development bogs down at some point because people get frustrated about unfixed issues/new issues and eventually somebody would start something new, and repeat. Best you can expect is a successful port of completed file system IMHO.
                  Last edited by aht0; 06-19-2019, 05:42 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It's amazing DragonflyBSD developers were able to write their own file system while bigger teams like FreeBSD and even Linux seem to have problems with such goals.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X