Originally posted by energyman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Finally, Reiser4 Benchmarks Against EXT4 & Btrfs
Collapse
X
-
pejakm, that from you?I am shocked, really, I am.
And RobbieAB, using broken patches and then mentioning that some tests did not run, is hurtting reiser4 and is bad for phoronix. You sound like a little, butthurt extX fanboy.
If Michael would have used the CORRECT patches, I am pretty sure all tests would have run. But so he hurt reiser4. Deliberately or not?
'We' complain that the test was not fair. And your own words support that. The test is BULLSHIT. Ok?
I have tried zen in the past and there were ALWAYS problems with that pile of crap. Always.
I can't remember the last time I had any problems with reiser4 using Edward's fine patches. Early 2007 AFAIR.
Why did Micheal use patches from some obscure project instead of the original ones? There is no sense in Micheal's choice
Comment
-
Originally posted by energyman View Postpejakm, that from you?I am shocked, really, I am.
How about politely ask Michael to use vanilla kernel just with the reiser4 patchset? Maybe he would respond to that?
Comment
-
Originally posted by energyman View PostAnd RobbieAB, using broken patches and then mentioning that some tests did not run, is hurtting reiser4 and is bad for phoronix. You sound like a little, butthurt extX fanboy.
Yes, I use ext3 mostly, but that choice was based on specific reasons going back many years, and I have never had any reason to consider changing. For me, it does what I want. That is enough reason to use it, FOR ME. Your usage and desires may be different.
Originally posted by energyman View PostIf Michael would have used the CORRECT patches, I am pretty sure all tests would have run. But so he hurt reiser4. Deliberately or not?
'We' complain that the test was not fair. And your own words support that. The test is BULLSHIT. Ok?
My complaint is that he misrepresents what he tested. By his own account, what he tested outright failed some tests. Is this acceptable in a file-system? I say not. Does he outright slam the patchset he tested? No. Why not?
The fact he should have tested a different patchset, or carried out tests on different hardware, don't change the fundamental complaint I have which is that he reports his results in a questionable manner.
Originally posted by energyman View PostI have tried zen in the past and there were ALWAYS problems with that pile of crap. Always.
I can't remember the last time I had any problems with reiser4 using Edward's fine patches. Early 2007 AFAIR.
Why did Micheal use patches from some obscure project instead of the original ones? There is no sense in Micheal's choice
Only Micheal can explain his choice of patchsets, I have never even attempted to defend that. Maybe if he used a different patchset it would have passed those tests and wowed us all with it's performance. Does that change my comments that he is mis-reporting what he DID test?
Comment
-
Originally posted by pejakm View PostI'm sorry to hear that, but realize that being impolite in your posts is definitely not a good way to discuss something, and will get you nowhere. You keep flaming Michael for using broken patches: I'm using zen patches for about a year and a half, and the only issues I had were due to recently introduced BFS (which you don't have to use, by the way), but this also is fixed very quickly. As I understand, zen kernel uses Edwards reiser4 patches.
How about politely ask Michael to use vanilla kernel just with the reiser4 patchset? Maybe he would respond to that?
and zen patches are not Edward - at least not 'vanilla' - or there wouldn't have been that -rcX clusterfuck where it was so badly broken, they warned in their notes about it.
If you want reliable results, Edward'S patches are the only choice. How can you even can come up with the ida that extracting patches from a very experimental and very untested kernel is a good idea?
Comment
-
Originally posted by energyman View PostHow can you even can come up with the ida that extracting patches from a very experimental and very untested kernel is a good idea?
I'm not very skilled with git, but I'll try to extract reiser4 patches and then compare it with Edwards (found here: ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kerne...eiser4-for-2.6). It would be interesting to see the differences, don't you think so?
Comment
Comment